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 .

A comparison of volume clamp method-based continuous noninvasive cardiac output (CNCO) measurement versus intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution in postoperative cardiothoracic surgery patients

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

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

Accuracy of continuous thermodilution cardiac output measurement during liver transplantation

Comparision of cardiac output measured by transthoracic echocardiography with continuous cardiac output measured by pressure recording analytical method

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

Comparison of parameter types for the calibration of noninvasive continuous cardiac output monitoring of patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery in the prone position

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

Noninvasive Measurement Of Carbon Dioxide During One-Lung Ventilation With Low Tidal Volume For Two Hours: End-Tidal Versus Transcutaneous Techniques

Validation of the Use of Foreign Gas Rebreathing Method for Non-Invasive Determination of Cardiac Output in Heart Disease Patients

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

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

Non-invasive estimated continuous cardiac output (escCO) during severe sepsis and septic shock resuscitation

A performance comparison of the most commonly used minimally invasive monitors of cardiac output

Comparison of noninvasive continuous arterial blood pressure measured by NICAP with arterial line in elderly patients

Comparison of Ultrasonic Cardiac Output Monitor and Pulse Indicated Continuous Cardiac Output Monitor on Determination of Hemodynamic Parameters in Critical Patients

Continuous Blood Pressure Monitoring Via Non-Invasive Radial Artery Applanation Tonometry and Invasive Arterial Catheter Demonstrates Good Agreement in Patients Undergoing Colon Carcinoma Surgery

Cardiac output monitoring in paediatric cardiac surgery: a review

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

Agreement between Electrical Cardiometry and Pulmonary Artery Thermodilution for Measuring Cardiac Output in Isoflurane-Anesthetized Dogs

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