Abstract:Background: In morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, the combination of obesity-related comorbidities, pneumoperitoneum and extreme posture changes constitutes a high risk of perioperative hemodynamic complications. Thus, an advanced hemodynamic monitoring including continuous cardiac index (CI) assessment is desirable. While invasive catheterization may bear technical difficulties, transesophageal echocardiography is contraindicated due to the surgical procedure. Evidence on the clinical reliability of alternative semi- or non-invasive cardiac monitoring devices is limited. The aim was to compare the non-invasive vascular unloading to a semi-invasive pulse contour analysis reference technique for continuous CI measurements in bariatric surgical patients. Methods: This prospective observational study included adult patients scheduled for elective, laparoscopic bariatric surgery after obtained institutional ethics approval and written informed consent. CI measurements were performed using the vascular unloading technique (Nexfin®) and semi-invasive reference method (FloTrac™). At 10 defined measurement time points, the influence of clinically indicated body posture changes, passive leg raising, fluid bolus administration and pneumoperitoneum was evaluated pre- and intraoperatively. Correlation, Bland-Altman and concordance analyses were performed. Results: Sixty patients (mean BMI 49.2 kg/m2) were enrolled into the study and data from 54 patients could be entered in the final analysis. Baseline CI was 3.2 ± 0.9 and 3.3 ± 0.8 l/min/m2, respectively. Pooled absolute CI values showed a positive correlation (rs = 0.76, P < 0.001) and mean bias of of - 0.16 l/min/m2 (limits of agreement: - 1.48 to 1.15 l/min/m2) between the two methods. Pooled percentage error was 56.51%, missing the criteria of interchangeability (< 30%). Preoperatively, bias ranged from - 0.33 to 0.08 l/min/m2 with wide limits of agreement. Correlation of CI was best (rs = 0.82, P < 0.001) and percentage error lowest (46.34%) during anesthesia and after fluid bolus administration. Intraoperatively, bias ranged from - 0.34 to - 0.03 l/min/m2 with wide limits of agreement. CI measurements correlated best during pneumoperitoneum and after fluid bolus administration (rs = 0.77, P < 0.001; percentage error 35.95%). Trending ability for all 10 measurement points showed a concordance rate of 85.12%, not reaching the predefined Critchley criterion (> 92%). Conclusion: Non-invasive as compared to semi-invasive CI measurements did not reach criteria of interchangeability for monitoring absolute and trending values of CI in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Trial registration: The study was registered retrospectively on June 12, 2017 with the registration number NCT03184272 .

Reliability of bioreactance and pulse power analysis in measuring cardiac index during open abdominal aortic surgery.

Comparison of Bioimpedance Versus Pulse Contour Analysis for Intraoperative Cardiac Index Monitoring in Patients Undergoing Kidney Transplantation

Comparison of accuracy of two uncalibrated pulse contour cardiac output monitors in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery patients using pulmonary artery catheter-thermodilution as a reference

Comparing the Mutual Interchangeability of ECOM, FloTrac/Vigileo, 3D-TEE, and ITD-PAC Cardiac Output Measuring Systems in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Major Upper Abdominal Surgery Alters the Calibration of Bioreactance Cardiac Output Readings, the NICOM, When Comparisons Are Made Against Suprasternal and Esophageal Doppler Intraoperatively

Accuracy of continuous thermodilution cardiac output measurement during liver transplantation

Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study

Clinical significance of pulse indicator continuous cardiac output in pediatric patients undergoing open-heart surgery

Accuracy and Trending Ability of Blood Pressure and Cardiac Index Measured by ClearSight System in Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Comparison of Two Cardiac Output Monitors, qCO and LiDCO, During General Anesthesia

A comparison of ClearSight noninvasive cardiac output and pulmonary artery bolus thermodilution cardiac output in cardiac surgery patients

Accuracy and trending ability of the fourth-generation FloTrac/Vigileo System™ in patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

Comparison of the ClearSight™ finger cuff monitor versus invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients: a prospective observational study

A Comparison of Photoplethysmography Versus Esophageal Doppler for the Assessment of Cardiac Index During Major Noncardiac Surgery

Use of an Artificial Intelligence Device for Evaluating Blood Loss in Complex Major Orthopaedic Surgery Procedures

A Comparison of Outcome in Patient With and Without Undergoing Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET)

The Use of Pressure Recording Analytical Method in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: The Impact on Clinical Decisions for the Appropriate Postoperative Setting and Cost-effective Analysis

A comparison of single and double arterial cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass for acute type A aortic surgery: A single center, retrospective observational study

Occurrence of Low Cardiac Index During Normotensive Periods in Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study Using Continuous Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitoring

Non-invasive Cardiac Output Measurement in Children Using Bioreactance:A Comparison with Echocar-Diography

A multivariate and retrospective analysis of the impact of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in Open-Heart surgery