Comparison of three non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods in critically ill children

Abstract

© 2018 Chaiyakulsil et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Introduction Hemodynamic parameters measurements were widely conducted using pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) with thermodilution as a reference standard. Due to its technical difficulties in children, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) has been widely employed instead. Nonetheless, TTE requires expertise and is time-consuming. Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring such as ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM) and electrical velocimetry (EV) can be performed rapidly with less expertise requirement. Presently, there are inconsistent evidences, variable precision, and reproducibility of EV, USCOM and TTE measurements. Our objective was to compare USCOM, EV and TTE in hemodynamic measurements in critically ill children. Materials and methods This was a single center, prospective observational study in critically ill children. Children with congenital heart diseases and unstable hemodynamics were excluded. Simultaneous measurements of hemodynamic parameters were conducted using USCOM, EV, and TTE. Inter-rater reliability was determined. Bland-Altman plots were used to analyse agreement of assessed parameters. Results Analysis was performed in 121 patients with mean age of 4.9 years old and 56.2% of male population. Interrater reliability showed acceptable agreement in all measured parameters (stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO), velocity time integral (VTI), inotropy (INO), flow time corrected (FTC), aortic valve diameter (AV), systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and stroke volume variation (SVV); (Cronbach’s alpha 0.76–0.98). Percentages of error in all parameters were acceptable by Bland-Altman analysis (9.2–28.8%) except SVR (30.8%) and SVV (257.1%). Conclusion Three noninvasive methods might be used interchangeably in pediatric critical care settings with stable hemodynamics. Interpretation of SVV and SVR measurements must be done with prudence.