心血管疾病专栏

电子心力监测法在危重患儿心功能监测中的应用

  • 刘雪 ,
  • 熊小雨 ,
  • 蒋坤凤 ,
  • 邱维 ,
  • 李静
展开
  • 1.重庆医科大学附属儿童医院 重症医学科,国家儿童健康与疾病临床医学研究中心儿童发育疾病研究教育部重点实验室 儿科学重庆市重点实验室(重庆 400014)
    2.重庆医科大学附属儿童医院 超声科 国家儿童健康与疾病临床医学研究中心儿童发育疾病研究教育部重点实验室 儿科学重庆市重点实验室(重庆 400014)

收稿日期: 2021-11-04

  网络出版日期: 2022-07-08

Application of electric impedance in monitoring cardiac function of pediatric critically ill patients

  • Xue LIU ,
  • Xiaoyu XIONG ,
  • Kunfeng JIANG ,
  • Wei QIU ,
  • Jing LI
Expand
  • 1. Department of Critical Care Medicine,Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Developmental and Disorders, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Pediatrics, Chongqing 400014, China
    2. Department of Ultrasound, Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Developmental and Disorders, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Pediatrics, Chongqing 400014, China

Received date: 2021-11-04

  Online published: 2022-07-08

摘要

目的 探讨电子心力监测法(ICON)与超声心动图(ECHO)两种无创心功能监测方法监测危重患儿心功能的相关性及一致性。方法 选取2020年1月—2021年3月在重症医学科进行治疗的53例患儿,同时使用ECHO和ICON进行心功能监测,并记录每博量(SV)和心排血量(CO),比较两种方法监测心功能的相关性及一致性。结果 53例患儿中男37例、女16例,年龄15.0(5.1~63.0)月。ICON与ECHO测量的SV、CO差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),存在正相关关系(r=0.91、0.85,P均<0.001);ICON和ECHO两种方法监测的SV和CO的一致性好,其组内相关系数(ICC)分别为0.89和0.87(P均<0.001)。采用Bland-Altman法进行一致性分析,ECHO与ICON监测的SV差值平均值为2.29 mL,一致性区间为–17.02~21.60 mL;CO差值的平均值为0.27 mL,一致性区间为–1.83~2.36 mL。使用呼吸机时两种方法测得的SV和CO的相关系数分别为0.88和0.82(P均<0.001),ICC值分别为0.86和0.87(P均<0.001);未使用呼吸机时测得的SV和CO的相关系数分别为0.89和0.89(P均<0.001),ICC值分别为0.91和0.86(P均<0.001)。结论 危重患儿ICON与ECHO监测心功能一致性及相关性均好,且不受使用呼吸机的影响,在儿童重症监护中有一定的应用价值。

本文引用格式

刘雪 , 熊小雨 , 蒋坤凤 , 邱维 , 李静 . 电子心力监测法在危重患儿心功能监测中的应用[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2022 , 40(7) : 522 -526 . DOI: 10.12372/jcp.2022.21e1541

Abstract

Objective To investigate the correlation and consistency of electric impedance (ICON) and echocardiography (ECHO) in monitoring the heart function of pediatric critically ill patients. Methods A total of 53 children treated in the intensive care unit from January 2020 to March 2021 were recruited. ECHO and ICON were used to monitor cardiac function, and stroke volume (SV) and cardiac output (CO) were recorded to compare the correlation and consistency between the two methods. Results A total of 53 children (37 boys and 16 girls) were included, with a median age of 15.0 (5.1-63.0) months. There was no statistically significant difference in SV and CO measured by ICON and ECHO (P>0.05), and there was a significantly positive correlation (r=0.91 and 0.85, both P<0.001). The consistency of SV and CO monitored by ICON and ECHO was good, and the intra- class correlation coefficients (ICC) were 0.89 and 0.87, respectively (P<0.001). Bland-altman method was used for consistency analysis. The average SV difference between ECHO and ICON was 2.29 mL, and the consistency interval was -17.02-21.60 mL. The average difference of CO monitored by ECHO and ICON was 0.27mL, and the consistency interval was -1.83-2.36mL. Under the condition of using ventilator, the correlation coefficients of SV and CO measured by the two methods were 0.88 and 0.82 (both P<0.001), and the ICC values were 0.86 and 0.87 (both P<0.001). The correlation coefficients of SV and CO measured by the two methods without using the ventilator were 0.89 and 0.89 (both P<0.001), and the ICC valueswere 0.91 and 0.86 (both P<0.001). Conclusions ICON and ECHO have good consistency and correlation in monitoring the cardiac function of critically ill children, and are not affected by the use of ventilators. Therefore, they have certain application values in pediatric intensive care.

参考文献

[1] 李静, 许峰. 儿童重症无创血流动力学监测[J]. 中华实用儿科临床杂志, 2019, 34(18): 1368-1371.
[2] Woodman HM, Lee C, Ahmed AN, et al. Cardiac output monitoring in paediatric cardiac surgery: a review[J]. Cardiol Young, 2021, 31(1): 23-30.
[3] Rodríguez Sánchez de la Blanca A, Sánchez Luna M, González Pacheco N, et al. Electrical velocimetry for non-invasive monitoring of the closure of the ductus arteriosus in preterm infants[J]. Eur J Pediatr, 2018, 177(2): 229-235.
[4] Rali AS, Buechler T, Van Gotten B, et al. Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in cardiogenic shock: the NICOM Study[J]. J Card Fail, 2020, 26(2): 160-165.
[5] Altamirano-Diaz L, Welisch E, Dempsey AA, et al. Non-invasive measurement of cardiac output in children with repaired coarctation of the aorta using electrical cardiometry compared to transthoracic Doppler echocardiography[J]. Physiol Meas, 2018, 39(5): 055003.
[6] Elgebaly AS, Anwar AG, Fathy SM, et al. The accuracy of electrical cardiometry for the noninvasive determination of cardiac output before and after lung surgeries compared to transthoracic echocardiography[J]. Ann Card Anaesth, 2020, 23(3): 288-292.
[7] Xu SH, Zhang J, Zhang Y, et al. Non-invasive cardiac output measurement by electrical cardiometry and M-mode echocardiography in the neonate: a prospective observational study of 136 neonatal infants[J]. Transl Pediatr, 2021, 10(7): 1757-1764.
[8] Sanders M, Servaas S, Slagt C. Accuracy and precision of non-invasive cardiac output monitoring by electrical cardiometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Clin Monit Comput, 2020, 34(3): 433-460.
[9] Hsu KH, Wu TW, Wu IH, et al. Electrical cardiometry to monitor cardiac output in preterm infants with patent ductus arteriosus: a comparison with echocardiography[J]. Neonatology, 2017, 112(3): 231-237.
[10] Lai WW, Geva T, Shirali GS, et al. Guidelines and standards for performance of a pediatric echocardiogram: a report from the Task Force of the Pediatric Council of the American Society of Echocardiography[J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2006, 19(12): 1413-1430.
[11] Bernstein DP. Bernstein-Osypka stroke volume equation for impedance cardiography: citation correction[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2007, 33(5): 923.
[12] Crittendon I 3rd, Dreyer WJ, Decker JA, Kim JJ. Ultrasound dilution: an accurate means of determining cardiac output in children[J]. Pediatr Crit Care Med, 2012, 13(1): 42-46.
[13] Absi MA, Lutterman J, Wetzel GT. Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring in the pediatric cardiac intensive care unit[J]. Curr Opin Cardiol, 2010, 25(2): 77-79.
[14] Deep A, Goonasekera CD, Wang Y, Brierley J. Evolution of haemodynamics and outcome of fluid-refractory septic shock in children[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2013, 39(9): 1602-1609.
[15] Chaiyakulsil C, Chantra M, Katanyuwong P, et al. Comparison of three non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods in critically ill children[J]. PLoS One, 2018, 13(6): e0199203.
[16] Altamirano-Diaz L, Welisch E, Rauch R, et al. Does obesity affect the non-invasive measurement of cardiac output performed by electrical cardiometry in children and adolescents[J]. J Clin Monit Comput, 2018, 32(1): 45-52.
[17] Weisz DE, Jain A, Ting J, et al. Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in preterm infants undergoing patent ductus arteriosus ligation: a comparison with echocardiography[J]. Neonatology, 2014, 106(4): 330-336.
[18] Doherty A, El-Khuffash A, Monteith C, et al. Comparison of bioreactance and echocardiographic non-invasive cardiac output monitoring and myocardial function assessment in primagravida women[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2017, 118(4): 527-532.
[19] Blohm ME, Hartwich J, Obrecht D, et al. Effect of patent ductus arteriosus and patent foramen ovale on left ventricular stroke volume measurement by electrical velocimetry in comparison to transthoracic echocardiography in neonates[J]. J Clin Monit Comput, 2017, 31(3): 589-598.
[20] 杨玉兰, 钟桂朝, 杨琳, 等. 两种无创心功能监测方法监测早产儿早期心功能的可靠性评价[J]. 中国小儿急救医学, 2019, (11): 830-835.
[21] Grollmuss O, Demontoux S, Capderou A, et al. Electrical velocimetry as a tool for measuring cardiac output in small infants after heart surgery[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2012, 38(6): 1032-1039.
[22] Kuster M, Haltmeier T, Exadaktylos A, et al. Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring device "ICON" in trauma patients: a feasibility study[J]. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2019, 45(6): 1069-1076.
文章导航

/