MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102267804 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318246c32c

Poor Accuracy of Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitoring Using Bioimpedance Cardiography [PhysioFlow®] Compared to Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pediatric Patients

2012· article· en· W2102267804 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Taylor, Cedric Manlhiot, Brian W. McCrindle, Lars Grosse‐Wortmann, Helen Holtby

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingInferior vena cavaBody surface areaCardiac imagingCardiac outputAscending aortaCardiac magnetic resonance imagingHemodynamicsDescending aortaPulmonary arteryCardiologyCardiac surgeryNuclear medicineInternal medicineRadiologyAorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Identification of low cardiac output (CO) states in anesthesia is important because preoperative hemodynamic optimization may improve outcome in surgery. Accurate real-time CO measurement would be useful in optimizing "goal-directed" therapy. We sought to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of CO measurement using bioimpedance cardiography (PhysioFlow®, NeuMeDx, Bristol, PA) in pediatric patients with and without cardiac disease undergoing anesthesia for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: All consenting patients undergoing anesthesia for cardiac MRI were enrolled. After equilibration of anesthesia for ≥10 minutes, 6 PhysioFlow electrodes were applied to the patient's chest for continuous real-time monitoring for 10 minutes. Data were stored in 15-second epochs and later averaged offline to obtain CO. Phase contrast MRI measurements of flow volumes in the superior vena cava and ascending and descending aorta were made from a single imaging plane through all 3 vessels at the level of the right pulmonary artery. Both CO measurements were indexed to body surface area. The anesthetic technique was the same for both measurements. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were enrolled and 23 were analyzed. The median age at study was 2.8 years (range, 0.02-8.02 years) and median body surface area was 0.54 m(2) (range, 0.21-1.00 m(2)). Eleven of the 23 patients (48%) were males. Patients were grouped into those with univentricular physiology, 6 of 23 (26%); biventricular physiology with shunt, 3 of 23 (13%); biventricular without shunt, 10 of 23 (43%); and no structural heart disease, 4 of 23 (17%). The mean bias was -0.34 ± 1.50 L/min/m(2) (P = 0.29). The 95% limits of agreement were -3.21 to +2.69 L/min/m(2). Only 8 of 23 measurements (35%) were within 20% and 14 of 23 measurements (61%) were within 30% of each other. CONCLUSION: PhysioFlow performance was not sufficiently accurate in this population. Modifications of the algorithm and further testing are required before this device can be recommended for routine clinical use in pediatric patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207