DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Longrois, Dan | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-06-17T10:26:39Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-06-17T10:26:39Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | |
dc.identifier.citation | LONGROIS, Dan. Can the pulmonary artery catheter be replaced by less invasive cardiac out put monitors? In: Arta Medica. 2009, nr. 3(36), supl. Congresul II Internaţional al SARRM, pp. 44-45. ISSN 1810-1852. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1810-1852 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.usmf.md/handle/20.500.12710/10451 | |
dc.description | Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Département d`Anesthésie-Réanimation Chirurgicale, 75018 Paris, France, Congresul II Internaţional al Societăţii Anesteziologie Reanimatologie din Republica Moldova 27-30 august 2009 | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Monitoring of cardiac output (CO) is used in the context of anesthesia and intensive care to: (i) detect, before clinical signs
become obvious, that cardiovascular performance is altered; (ii) find the causes of alteration; (iii) change therapy; (iv) improve
outcome and resource utilization. In the literature, CO monitoring has been approached in different but complimentary knowledge domains. These concern (i)
technical issues (what is really measured and how is CO calculated?; are the measurements continuous versus discontinuous ?);
(ii) invasiveness, which according to the definition of this term can classify different CO monitors as invasive, minimally invasive
or non invasive; it is worth mentioning that it is not because a monitor is considered as non invasive that it can be used under all
clinical circumstances; for instance, transoesophageal doppler monitors are considered as non invasive but their use in awake, non
intubated patients is nearly impossible; (iii) diagnostic performance as compared to a gold standard or reference technique; most
of the literature on comparisons of CO monitors has been dedicated to diagnostic performance; (iv) changes in medical practice
based on information provided by each type of CO monitors; (v) changes in outcome and resource utilization.
In this presentation, in order to answer the question formulated in the title, I will discuss two issues: (i) comparisons of diagnostic
performance with focus on the statistical tools 1-3, used for comparisons and the clinical relevance of these comparisons; with the
statistical tools and adequate clinical reasoning we should be able to assert the interchangeability of different CO monitors (ii) the
impact of CO monitoring on patient outcome and resource utilization ; I will analyse critically the available literature and attempt
to explain why the use of CO monitors has not results in measurable changes in patient outcome. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Asociaţia chirurgilor “Nicolae Anestiadi” din Republica Moldova | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Blood Pressure | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Cardiac Output | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Stroke Volume | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Catheters | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Cardiac Catheters | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Pulmonary Artery | en_US |
dc.title | Can the pulmonary artery catheter be replaced by less invasive cardiac out put monitors? | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Arta Medica Vol. 36 No 3, 2009 supliment
|