Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017;7(4):410-415.
doi: 10.1007/s40140-017-0239-0. Epub 2017 Oct 27.

Cardiac Output Monitoring: Validation Studies-how Results Should be Presented

Affiliations
Review

Cardiac Output Monitoring: Validation Studies-how Results Should be Presented

Peter M Odor et al. Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2017.

Abstract

Purpose of review: Cardiac output monitors can be assessed by a variety of techniques, but a common principle is quantifying agreement between a reference standard and new monitor. The current standard analysis technique is a Bland-Altman plot. The Bland-Altman plot evaluates bias between mean differences of cardiac output, from which an agreement interval is derived. These limits are, however, statistical limits of agreement and the clinical acceptability will depend upon context and application. This article provides suggestions for understanding and presenting the results of cardiac output validation, using standard metrology alongside proposals for criteria used to accept new techniques.

Recent findings: Confusion about the appropriate way to report "precision" in method comparison studies stem from a lack of clarity on how single or repeated measurements should be interpreted. During serial measurements of cardiac output the true value changes, thus measurement should be considered as serial rather than repeated. Method agreement based upon precision achieved by cardiac output monitors needs to consider each method's general variability around true values obtained and this data should be generated and presented as part of each study design.

Summary: Studies should report serial measurements from two techniques for cardiac output monitoring. Results of similar techniques from other studies may not always be transferred and compared. Bias and intervals of agreement should be presented as Bland-Altman plots with dynamic cardiac output trends in polar plots. Percentage error should be calculated to allow appropriate comparison of techniques for study populations with different expected cardiac output values.

Keywords: Accuracy; Bland-Altman analysis; Cardiac output; Hemodynamic monitoring; Method comparison; Precision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

Peter Odor declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Sohail Bampoe declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Maurizio Cecconi has received research support through a grant from Edwards Lifesciences; has received compensation for service as a consultant from Edwards Lifesciences, LiDCO and Cheetah; and has served as a medical advisor to Directed Systems.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Bland-Altman plot and polar plots for new techniques versus reference techniques, with representation of the limits of agreement and lines of identity respectively (dotted lines)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Marik PE. Noninvasive cardiac output monitors: a state-of the-art review. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013;27(1):121–134. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2012.03.022. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Squara P, Denjean D, Estagnasie P, Brusset A, Dib JC, Dubois C. Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring (NICOM): a clinical validation. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33(7):1191–1194. doi: 10.1007/s00134-007-0640-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Scolletta S, Franchi F, Romagnoli S, Carlà R, Donati A, Fabbri LP, et al. Pulse wave analysis cardiac output validation (PulseCOval) group. Comparison between Doppler-echocardiography and uncalibrated pulse contour method for cardiac output measurement: a multicenter observational study. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(7):1370–1379. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001663. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ameloot K, Palmers PJ, Malbrain ML. The accuracy of noninvasive cardiac output and pressure measurements with finger cuff: a concise review. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2015;21(3):232–239. doi: 10.1097/MCC.0000000000000198. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Huber W, Koenig J, Mair S, Schuster T, Saugel B, Eyer F, et al. Predictors of the accuracy of pulse-contour cardiac index and suggestion of a calibration-index: a prospective evaluation and validation study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015;15:45. doi: 10.1186/s12871-015-0024-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources