↓ Skip to main content

Effects of hemodynamic monitoring using a single-use transesophageal echocardiography probe in critically ill patients – study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Effects of hemodynamic monitoring using a single-use transesophageal echocardiography probe in critically ill patients – study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2714-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Cioccari, Bjoern Zante, Andreas Bloch, David Berger, Andreas Limacher, Stephan M. Jakob, Jukka Takala, Tobias M. Merz

Abstract

Hemodynamic instability is one of the leading causes of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Early stabilization of hemodynamics is associated with improved outcome. The monitoring used to guide hemodynamic support may influence the time needed to achieve stable hemodynamics. Visualization of the heart using echocardiography offers the advantage of direct measurement of cardiac volumes and ventricular function. A miniaturized monoplane transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) probe was developed, allowing for almost continuous qualitative hemodynamic TEE assessment (hTEE) after brief bedside training. The primary objective of the study is to assess whether hemodynamic monitoring using the hTEE technology shortens time to resolution of shock in ICU patients in comparison to standard monitoring using a central venous catheter, pulmonary artery catheter, or conventional echocardiography. Five hundred consecutive subjects with circulatory shock (low mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and signs of organ hypoperfusion) at the time of ICU admission are included in the study. The subjects are randomly assigned to one of four groups using a 2 × 2 factorial design stratified by method of hemodynamic monitoring (hTEE vs standard hemodynamic monitoring) and frequency of hemodynamic assessments (minimum every 4 h vs standard of care). The primary study outcome is the time from study inclusion to resolution of circulatory shock, defined as MAP >  60 mmHg for ≥ 4 h after discontinuation of vasopressors and inotropes. The hTEE monitoring consists of the acquisition of three defined echocardiography views: Transgastric mid-esophageal short axis with measurement of fractional area change of left ventricle, mid-esophageal four-chamber view with measurement of the ratio of right to left ventricular area, and mid-esophageal ascending aortic short-axis view with measurement of the superior vena cava collapsibility index. In the control groups, monitoring modalities, including conventional TTE and TEE but not hTEE, are at the discretion of the treating physician. The interpretation of hemodynamic monitoring and the subsequent changes in patient management are recorded after each hemodynamic assessment. Differences in the primary and further secondary time-to-event outcomes will be assessed using a competing risk model accounting for the competing risk of death. The effect of using echocardiography as a monitoring modality on relevant patient outcomes has not been established so far. The study at hand may be one of the first trials to provide detailed data on effectiveness and safety of echocardiography to guide treatment in patients with circulatory shock. ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02048566. Registered on January 29, 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 3 4%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 27 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 29 40%