Table 1.
Assessment of CO and intravascular volume | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Method | Hemodynamic variables | Limitations | Invasiveness and monitoring frequency | Applicability |
Neonatologist performed echocardiography (NPE) | CO, vena cava superior flow, shunts, structural and functional abnormalities Left ventricular end-diastolic volume Vena cava collapsibility |
Intensive training Intra-/interobserver variability 20% Error in assessment of VTI (angle of insonation) and CSA |
Non-invasive Intermittent |
Clinical use (absolute values of CO) Preload assessment limited for clinical use |
Transcutaneous doppler (USCOM®) | CO | Large interobserver variability Error in assessment of VTI (angle of insonation) and CSA No anatomical verification of sample area Low precision |
Non-invasive Intermittent |
Limited clinical use (trend monitoring) |
Thoracic electrical bio-impedance (ICON®, NICOM®) | CO | Influenced by position of surface electrodes, changes in tissue water content (pulmonary edema, pleural effusion), alterations in heart rate and motion artifacts | Non-invasive Continuous |
Clinical use (trend monitoring) |
Arterial pulse contour analysis (APCA) | CO | Influenced by changes in vascular compliance, vasomotor tone, medication, irregular heart rate, and motion artifacts | Invasive | Research setting |
PPV, SVV, HRV | Influenced by physiological aliasing Frequent calibration necessary |
Continuous | Research setting | |
TPTD | CO Hemodynamic volumes (GEDV, ITV) |
Use of ice-cold saline Thermistor-tipped catheter needed Arterial (femoral) and central venous catheter needed Fluid overload after multiple injections |
Invasive Continuous |
Only >3 kg Research setting |
TPUD | CO, shunt detection and quantification Continuous COHemodynamic volumes (TEDV, CBV, ACV)EVLW |
Arterial and central venous catheter needed Risk of fluid overload after multiple injections |
Invasive Intermittent Continuous measurement possible (APCA) |
Clinical use (absolute values of CO)APCA as trend monitoring Research setting |
Stop flow method | Mean systemic filling pressure | Venous and arterial access in the same extremity Influenced by physiological factors (higher thoracic and arterial compliance and low tidal volumes compared to adults) and physiological aliasing |
Invasive Intermittent |
Research setting |
Plethysmograph variability index | Perfusion index Fluid responsiveness |
Non-invasive Continuous |
Research setting | |
Assessment of organ perfusion and oxygen delivery | ||||
Laser doppler flowmetry | Microcirculation (flow velocity) | Signal processing limitations Calibration problems Motion artifacts and probe pressure effects Influenced by skin temperature and vasopressors |
Non-invasive Intermittent |
Research setting |
OPS, SDF, IDF | Microcirculation | Signal processing limitations (time-consuming) Effects of probe pressure Influenced by skin temperature, hemoglobin levels, and vasopressors |
Non-invasive Intermittent |
Research setting |
NIRS | Regional blood flow, regional tissue oxygenation, and fractional tissue extraction | Lack of validation Considerable probe bias Different methods with different mathematical models Multiple assumptions Accuracy and precision questionable |
Non-invasive Continuous |
Clinical use (trend monitoring) |
CO, cardiac output; VTI, velocity-time integral; CSA, cross-sectional area; PPV, pulse pressure variation; SVV, stroke volume variation; HRV, heart rate variability; TPTD, transpulmonary thermodilution; GEDV, global end-diastolic blood volume; ITBV, intrathoracic blood volume; TPUD, transpulmonary ultrasound dilution; TEDV, total end-diastolic volume; CBV, central blood volume; ACV, active circulating volume, EVLW, extra vascular lung water; OPS, orthogonal polarization spectral; SDF, sidestream darkfield imaging; IDF, incident dark field imaging; NIRS, near infrared spectroscopy.