About: Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ScholarlyArticle, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	Academic Article research paper schema:ScholarlyArticle
isDefinedBy	Covid-on-the-Web dataset
has title	Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study
Creator	Barthélémy, Benjamin, Glenn Cholley, Chousterman, Ditchi, Dramé, Mebazaa, Neuschwander, Arthur Pirracchio, Redouté, Stern,
Source	PMC
abstract	PURPOSE: The pressure recording analytical method (PRAM) monitor is a non-invasive pulse contour cardiac output (CO) device that cannot be considered interchangeable with the gold standard for CO estimation. It, however, generates additional hemodynamic indices that need to be evaluated. Our objective was to investigate the performance of a multiparametric predictive score based on a combination of several parameters generated by the PRAM monitor to predict fluid responsiveness. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a prospective observational study from April 2016 to December 2017 in two French teaching hospitals. We included critically ill patients who were monitored by esophageal Doppler monitoring and an invasive arterial line, and received a 250–500 mL crystalloid fluid challenge. The main outcome measure was the predictive score discrimination evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve. RESULTS: The three baseline PRAM-derived parameters associated with fluid responsiveness in univariate analysis were pulse pressure variation, cardiac cycle efficiency, and arterial elastance (P < 0.01, P = 0.03, and P < 0.01, respectively). The median [interquartile range] predictive score, calculated after discretization of these parameters according to their optimal threshold value was 3 [2–3] in fluid responders and 1 [1–2] in fluid non-responders, respectively (P < 0.001). The area under the curve of the predictive score was 0.807 (95% confidence interval, 0.662 to 0.909; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A multiparametric score combining three parameters generated by the PRAM monitor can predict fluid responsiveness with good positive and negative predictive values in intensive care unit patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12630-020-01736-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
has issue date	2020-06-04(xsd:dateTime)
bibo:doi	10.1007/s12630-020-01736-y
bibo:pmid	32500514
has license	no-cc
sha1sum (hex)	335e0059d0f6bd05fe15925b95690746a61d63f7
schema:url	https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-020-01736-y
resource representing a document's title	Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study
has PubMed Central identifier	PMC7271959
has PubMed identifier	32500514
schema:publication	Can J Anaesth
resource representing a document's body	covid:335e0059d0f6bd05fe15925b95690746a61d63f7#body_text
is schema:about of	named entity 'prediction' named entity 'score' named entity 'Diagnostic Accuracy' named entity 'hemodynamic' named entity 'hemodynamic' named entity 'Chichester' named entity 'gold standard' named entity 'blood flow' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'attending physician' named entity 'arterial line' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'Informed consent' named entity 'area under the curve' named entity 'systolic' named entity 'transducer' named entity 'arterial pressure' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'hemodynamic' named entity 'France' named entity 'arterial pressure' named entity 'Categorical variables' named entity 'Pulse pressure' named entity '95% CI' named entity 'ICUs' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'tidal volume' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'Physiology' named entity 'cardiac dysrhythmia' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'velocity' named entity 'hemodynamic' named entity 'arterial line' named entity 'haemodynamic' named entity 'cardiac cycle' named entity 'diagnostic accuracy' named entity 'impedance' named entity 'observational study' named entity 'cardiovascular' named entity 'intensive care unit' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'mechanically ventilated' named entity 'ventricular dysfunction' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'body mass index' named entity 'cardiac output' named entity '0.01' named entity 'gold standard' named entity 'arterial pressure' named entity 'cardiac output' named entity 'minimally invasive' named entity 'interquartile range' named entity 'pregnancy' named entity 'predictive performance' named entity '95% CI' named entity 'Padova' named entity 'negative likelihood ratio' named entity 'EDM' named entity 'lung' named entity 'cardiac output' named entity 'hypertension' named entity 'velocity' named entity 'ICU' named entity 'tidal volume' named entity 'predictive performance' named entity 'aorta' named entity '95% confidence interval' named entity 'ultrasound'

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software