Discuss the Value of PICCO and Echocardiography in Terms of Hemodynamic Monitoring

Abstract

Objective: To compare the measurements of cardiac output between PiCCO and color Doppler echocardiography and evaluate the consistency in patients with septic shock. Methods: 25 septic shock in-patients treated in the department of Intensive Critical Carewere chosen from Dec,2013 to Sep, 2014. Heart rate, invasive mean arterial pressure and systematic circulatory vascular resistant index at different times were measured by continuous PiCCO monitoring. The cardiac output at the same time was measured by the PiCCO thermodilution technology, pulse contour technology and color Doppler echocardiography. Results: There were no significant differences of the measurements of cardiac output between the PiCCO thermodilution technology and echocardiography atdifferent times(p > 0.05); The cardiac output measured by pulse contour technology was significantly lower than that by echocardiography at 2ndh (p < 0.05), there were no significant differences at other times. Conclusion: When the peripheral vascular resistance changes rapidly, the consistency of PiCCO thermodilution technology and echocardiography is better than that of pulse contour technology and echocardiography in the measurements of cardiac output. When patients have the similar hemodynamic changes like septic shock, we’d better use the PiCCO thermodilution technology to measure the cardiac output.