↓ Skip to main content

Transthoracic echocardiography: an accurate and precise method for estimating cardiac output in the critically ill patient

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
111 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
Title
Transthoracic echocardiography: an accurate and precise method for estimating cardiac output in the critically ill patient
Published in
Critical Care, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1737-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pablo Mercado, Julien Maizel, Christophe Beyls, Dimitri Titeca-Beauport, Magalie Joris, Loay Kontar, Antoine Riviere, Olivier Bonef, Thierry Soupison, Christophe Tribouilloy, Bertrand de Cagny, Michel Slama

Abstract

Cardiac output (CO) monitoring is a valuable tool for the diagnosis and management of critically ill patients. In the critical care setting, few studies have evaluated the level of agreement between CO estimated by transthoracic echocardiography (CO-TTE) and that measured by the reference method, pulmonary artery catheter (CO-PAC). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the precision and accuracy of CO-TTE relative to CO-PAC and the ability of transthoracic echocardiography to track variations in CO, in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. Thirty-eight mechanically ventilated patients fitted with a PAC were included in a prospective observational study performed in a 16-bed university hospital ICU. CO-PAC was measured via intermittent thermodilution. Simultaneously, a second investigator used standard-view TTE to estimate CO-TTE as the product of stroke volume and the heart rate obtained during the measurement of the subaortic velocity time integral. Sixty-four pairs of CO-PAC and CO-TTE measurements were compared. The two measurements were significantly correlated (r = 0.95; p < 0.0001). The median bias was 0.2 L/min, the limits of agreement (LOAs) were -1.3 and 1.8 L/min, and the percentage error was 25%. The precision was 8% for CO-PAC and 9% for CO-TTE. Twenty-six pairs of ΔCO measurements were compared. There was a significant correlation between ΔCO-PAC and ΔCO-TTE (r = 0.92; p < 0.0001). The median bias was -0.1 L/min and the LOAs were -1.3 and +1.2 L/min. With a 15% exclusion zone, the four-quadrant plot had a concordance rate of 94%. With a 0.5 L/min exclusion zone, the polar plot had a mean polar angle of 1.0° and a percentage error LOAs of -26.8 to 28.8°. The concordance rate was 100% between 30 and -30°. When using CO-TTE to detect an increase in ΔCO-PAC of more than 10%, the area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (95% CI) was 0.82 (0.62-0.94) (p < 0.001). A ΔCO-TTE of more than 8% yielded a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 66% for detecting a ΔCO-PAC of more than 10%. In critically ill mechanically ventilated patients, CO-TTE is an accurate and precise method for estimating CO. Furthermore, CO-TTE can accurately track variations in CO.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 111 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 186 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 24 13%
Student > Master 22 12%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Postgraduate 17 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Other 45 24%
Unknown 43 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 111 59%
Engineering 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 48 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2023.
All research outputs
#624,326
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#412
of 6,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,936
of 332,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#3
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,603 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.