Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 28 , ISSUE 7 ( July, 2024 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Evaluation of Electrical Cardiometry to Assess Fluid Responsiveness in Patients with Acute Circulatory Failure: A Comparative Study with Transthoracic Echocardiography

Shashikant Sharma, Rashmi Ramachandran, Vimi Rewari, Anjan Trikha

Keywords : Acute circulatory failure, Bland–Altman plot, Electrical cardiometry, Fluid responsiveness, Transthoracic echocardiography

Citation Information : Sharma S, Ramachandran R, Rewari V, Trikha A. Evaluation of Electrical Cardiometry to Assess Fluid Responsiveness in Patients with Acute Circulatory Failure: A Comparative Study with Transthoracic Echocardiography. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024; 28 (7):650-656.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24753

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-06-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: Acute circulatory failure is commonly encountered in critically ill patients, that requires fluid administration as the first line of treatment. However, only 50% of patients are fluid-responsive. Identification of fluid responders is essential to avoid the harmful effects of overzealous fluid therapy. Electrical cardiometry (EC) is a non-invasive bedside tool and has proven to be as good as transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to track changes in cardiac output. We aimed to look for an agreement between EC and TTE for tracking changes in cardiac output in adult patients with acute circulatory failure before and after the passive leg-raising maneuver. Materials and methods: Prospective comparative study, conducted at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital. Results: We recruited 125 patients with acute circulatory failure and found 42.4% (53 out of 125) to be fluid-responsive. The Bland–Altman plot analysis showed a mean difference of 2.08 L/min between EC and TTE, with a precision of 3.8 L/min. The limits of agreement (defined as bias ± 1.96SD), were −1.7 L/min and 5.8 L/min, respectively. The percentage of error between EC and TTE was 56% with acceptable limits of 30%. Conclusion: The percentage error beyond the acceptable limit suggests the non-interchangeability of the two techniques. More studies with larger sample sizes are required to establish the interchangeability of EC with TTE for tracking changes in cardiac output in critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure.


PDF Share
  1. Fleischmann-Struzek C, Mellhammar L, Rose N, Cassini A, Rudd KE, Schlattmann P, et al. Incidence and mortality of hospital- and ICU-treated sepsis: Results from an updated and expanded systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2020;46(8):1552–1562. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-06151-x.
  2. Marik PE, Linde-Zwirble WT, Bittner EA, Sahatjian J, Hansell D. Fluid administration in severe sepsis and septic shock, patterns and outcomes: An analysis of a large national database. Intensive Care Med 2017;43(5):625–632. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-016-4675-y.
  3. Tigabu BM, Davari M, Kebriaeezadeh A, Mojtahedzadeh M. Fluid volume, fluid balance and patient outcome in severe sepsis and septic shock: A systematic review. J Crit Care 2018;48:153–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.08.018.
  4. Marik PE, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Ann Intensive Care 2011;1(1):1. DOI: 10.1186/2110-5820-1-1.
  5. Kastrup M, Markewitz A, Spies C, Carl M, Erb J, Grosse J, et al. Current practice of hemodynamic monitoring and vasopressor and inotropic therapy in post-operative cardiac surgery patients in Germany: Results from a postal survey. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007;51(3):347–58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01190.x.
  6. Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest 2008;134(1):172–178. DOI: 10.1378/chest.07-2331.
  7. Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med 2009;37(9):2642–2647. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a590da.
  8. Barbier C, Loubières Y, Schmit C, Hayon J, Ricôme JL, Jardin F, et al. Respiratory changes in inferior vena cava diameter are helpful in predicting fluid responsiveness in ventilated septic patients. Intensive Care Med 2004;30(9):1740–1746. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-004-2259-8.
  9. Vieillard-Baron A, Augarde R, Prin S, Page B, Beauchet A, Jardin F, et al. Influence of superior vena caval zone condition on cyclic changes in right ventricular outflow during respiratory support. Anesthesiology 2001;95(5):1083–1088. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200111000-00010.
  10. Monnet X, Teboul JL. Passive leg raising: Five rules, not a drop of fluid! Crit Care 2015;19(1):18. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-014-0708-5.
  11. Préau S, Saulnier F, Dewavrin F, Durocher A, Chagnon JL. Passive leg raising is predictive of fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with severe sepsis or acute pancreatitis. Crit Care Med 2010;38(3):819–825. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181c8fe7a.
  12. Maizel J, Airapetian N, Lorne E, Tribouilloy C, Massy Z, Slama M, et al. Diagnosis of central hypovolemia by using passive leg raising. Intensive Care Med 2007;33(7):1133–1138. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0642-y.
  13. Lamia B, Ochagavia A, Monnet X, Chemla D, Richard C, Teboul JL, et al. Echocardiographic prediction of volume responsiveness in critically ill patients with spontaneously breathing activity. Intensive Care Med 2007;33(7):1125–1132. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0646-7.
  14. Zhang Y, Wang Y, Shi J, Hua Z, Xu J. Cardiac output measurements via echocardiography versus thermodilution: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2019;14(10):e0222105. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222105.
  15. Malik V, Subramanian A, Chauhan S, Hote M. Correlation of electric cardiometry and continuous thermodilution cardiac output monitoring systems. World Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2014;4(7):101–108. DOI: 10.4236/wjcs.2014.47016.
  16. Zoremba N, Bickenbach J, Krauss B, Rossaint R, Kuhlen R, Schälte G, et al. Comparison of electrical velocimetry and thermodilution techniques for the measurement of cardiac output. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007;51(10):1314–1319. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2007.01445.x.
  17. Juri T, Suehiro K, Tsujimoto S, Kuwata S, Mukai A, Tanaka K, et al. Pre-anesthetic stroke volume variation can predict cardiac output decrease and hypotension during induction of general anesthesia. J Clin Monit Comput 2018;32(3):415–422. DOI: 10.1007/s10877-017-0038-7.
  18. Elgebaly AS, Anwar AG, Fathy SM, Sallam A, Elbarbary Y. The accuracy of electrical cardiometry for the noninvasive determination of cardiac output before and after lung surgeries compared to transthoracic echocardiography. Ann Card Anaesth 2020;23(3):288–292. DOI: 10.4103/aca.ACA_196_18.
  19. Labib HA, Hussien RM, Salem YA. Monitoring the correlation between passive leg-raising maneuver and fluid challenge in pediatric cardiac surgery patients using impedance cardiography. The Egyptian Journal of Cardiothoracic Anesthesia 2016;10(1):17–22. DOI: 10.4103/1687-9090.183222.
  20. Kusumastuti NP, Osaki M. Electric velocimetry and transthoracic echocardiography for non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in children after cardiac surgery. Crit Care 2015;18:37. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305176455.
  21. Altamirano-Diaz L, Welisch E, Rauch R, Miller M, Park TS, Norozi K, et al. Does obesity affect the non-invasive measurement of cardiac output performed by electrical cardiometry in children and adolescents? J Clin Monit Comput 2018;32(1):45–52. DOI: 10.1007/s10877-017-9994-1.
  22. Martin E, Anyikam A, Ballas J, Buono K, Mantell K, Huynh-Covey T, et al. validation study of electrical cardiometry in pregnant patients using transthoracic echocardiography as the reference standard. J Clin Monit Comput 2016;30(5):679–686. DOI: 10.1007/s10877-015-9771-y.
  23. Soliman R, Zeid D, Yehya M, Nahas R. Bedside assessment of preload in acute circulatory failure using cardiac velocimetry. J Med Diagn Meth 2016;5:2. DOI: 10.4172/2168-9784.1000222.
  24. Effat H, Hamed K, Hamed G, Mostafa R, El Hadidy S. Electrical cardiometry versus carotid doppler in assessment of fluid responsiveness in critically Ill septic patients. The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine 2021;8(4):96–113. DOI: 10.1097/EJ9.0000000000000035.
  25. Elsayed Afandy M, El Sharkawy SI, Omara AF. Transthoracic echocardiographic versus cardiometry derived indices in management of septic patients. Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia 2020;36(1):312–318. DOI: 10.1080/11101849.2020.1854597.
  26. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1(8476):307–310. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
  27. Bernstein DP, Lemmens HJ. Stroke volume equation for impedance cardiography. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005;43(4):443–450. DOI: 10.1007/BF02344724.
  28. Critchley LA, Critchley JA. A meta-analysis of studies using bias and precision statistics to compare cardiac output measurement techniques. J Clin Monit Comput 1999;15(2):85–91. DOI: 10.1023/a:1009982611386.
  29. Xiao-ting W, Hua Z, Da-wei L, Hong-min Z, Huai-wu H, Yun L, et al. Changes in end-tidal CO2 could predict fluid responsiveness in the passive leg raising test but not in the mini-fluid challenge test: A prospective and observational study. J Crit Care 2015;30(5):1061–1066. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.05.019.
  30. Toupin F, Clairoux A, Deschamps A, Lebon JS, Lamarche Y, Lambert J, et al. Assessment of fluid responsiveness with end-tidal carbon dioxide using a simplified passive leg raising maneuver: A prospective observational study. Can J Anaesth 2016;63(9):1033–1041. DOI: 10.1007/s12630-016-0677-z.
  31. Caille V, Jabot J, Belliard G, Charron C, Jardin F, Vieillard-Baron A, et al. Hemodynamic effects of passive leg raising: An echocardiographic study in patients with shock. Intensive Care Med 2008;34(7):1239–1245. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-008-1067-y.
  32. Dong ZZ, Fang Q, Zheng X, Shi H. Passive leg raising as an indicator of fluid responsiveness in patients with severe sepsis. World J Emerg Med 2012;3(3):191–196. DOI: 10.5847/wjem.j.issn.1920-8642.2012. 03.006.
  33. Monnet X, Rienzo M, Osman D, Anguel N, Richard C, Pinsky MR, et al. Passive leg raising predicts fluid responsiveness in the critically ill. Crit Care Med 2006;34(5):1402–1407. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000215453.11735.06.
  34. Marik PE, Pendelton JE, Smith R. A comparison of hemodynamic parameters derived from transthoracic electrical bioimpedance with those parameters obtained by thermodilution and ventricular angiography. Crit Care Med 1997;25(9):1545–1550. DOI: 10.1097/0000 3246-199709000-00023.
  35. Wang DJ, Gottlieb SS. Impedance cardiography: more questions than answers. Curr Heart Fail Rep 2006;3(3):107–113. DOI: 10.1007/s11897-006-0009-7.
  36. Asllanaj B, Benge E, Bae J, McWhorter Y. Fluid management in septic patients with pulmonary hypertension, review of the literature. Front Cardiovasc Med 2023;10:1096871. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.109 6871.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.