Scholarlink

Background <p>The interest in the development of new technologies for systemic haemodynamic monitoring is increasing in the literature, applying physiology to daily practice, at the bedside of the frail comorbid patient.</p> Methods <p>We enrolled 88 patients (76.3 ± 12.0&#xa0;year, mean ± standard deviation) of the Internal Medicine Unit—Holding Area of the S.Andrea Hospital of Rome, with frailty and comorbidity. Every patient received a complete clinical examination and a bedside echoscopy through standard views, for the measurements of the left ventricle telesystolic and telediastolic volumes (TSV, TDV) and the inferior vena cava collapsibility.</p> Results <p>The sample group presented: body mass index (BMI) = 25.2 ± 3.8, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) = 123.4 ± 18.4 and 72.1 ± 11.3&#xa0;mmHg, heart rate (HR) = 76.0 ± 14.1&#xa0;bpm, comorbidity = 6.7 ± 3.2 coexisting diseases.</p> <p>The TDV, TSV volumes and the ejection fraction (EF) were respectively: 72.7 ± 33.6, 38.6 ± 25.7 and 50.3 + 15.1%. The haemodynamic parameters were: cardiac output (CO) = 2.7 ± 1.3&#xa0;l/min, cardiac index (CI) = 1.5 ± 0.7&#xa0;l/min/m2, central venous pressure (CVP) = 8.6 ± 2.6&#xa0;mmHg, SVR (systemic vascular resistance) = 3401.8 ± 2230.4 dyne × sec/cm<sup>5</sup> and SVR index (SVRI) = 4996.0 ± 3104.8 dyne × sec/cm<sup>5</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>.</p> <p>The linear regression analysis between CO and SVR and between CI and SVRI resulted respectively: r = -0.868 (<i>p</i> = 2.8 × 10<sup>–23</sup>) and r = -0.867 (<i>p</i> = 9.7 × 10<sup>–24</sup>). The polynomial regression analysis between CO and SVR and between CI and SVRI showed more significant results, respectively: R<sup>2</sup> = 0.828 (<i>p</i> = 1.8 × 10<sup>–27</sup>) and R<sup>2</sup> = 0.805 (<i>p</i> = 1.2 × 10<sup>–25</sup>).</p> Conclusions <p>In conclusion, the present study showed that the bedside POCUS approach supports an advanced clinical examination with significant advantages for the frail comorbid patients, since it is accurate, less expensive, repeatable and not invasive.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Polynomial Correlation Between The Cardiac Index And The Systemic Vascular Resistance Esteemed By The Bedside Echoscopy In The Frail Comorbid Patients

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月1日

查看全文
  • Antonio Martocchia,
  • Francesca Federico,
  • Laura Vero,
  • David Camiz,
  • Veronica Paterna,
  • Silvia Sciaulino,
  • Antonio Barbato,
  • Beata Ostrowska,
  • Paolo Martelletti,
  • Carmine Savoia,
  • Giorgio Sesti,
  • Luciano De Biase

摘要

Background

The interest in the development of new technologies for systemic haemodynamic monitoring is increasing in the literature, applying physiology to daily practice, at the bedside of the frail comorbid patient.

Methods

We enrolled 88 patients (76.3 ± 12.0 year, mean ± standard deviation) of the Internal Medicine Unit—Holding Area of the S.Andrea Hospital of Rome, with frailty and comorbidity. Every patient received a complete clinical examination and a bedside echoscopy through standard views, for the measurements of the left ventricle telesystolic and telediastolic volumes (TSV, TDV) and the inferior vena cava collapsibility.

Results

The sample group presented: body mass index (BMI) = 25.2 ± 3.8, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) = 123.4 ± 18.4 and 72.1 ± 11.3 mmHg, heart rate (HR) = 76.0 ± 14.1 bpm, comorbidity = 6.7 ± 3.2 coexisting diseases.

The TDV, TSV volumes and the ejection fraction (EF) were respectively: 72.7 ± 33.6, 38.6 ± 25.7 and 50.3 + 15.1%. The haemodynamic parameters were: cardiac output (CO) = 2.7 ± 1.3 l/min, cardiac index (CI) = 1.5 ± 0.7 l/min/m2, central venous pressure (CVP) = 8.6 ± 2.6 mmHg, SVR (systemic vascular resistance) = 3401.8 ± 2230.4 dyne × sec/cm5 and SVR index (SVRI) = 4996.0 ± 3104.8 dyne × sec/cm5/m2.

The linear regression analysis between CO and SVR and between CI and SVRI resulted respectively: r = -0.868 (p = 2.8 × 10–23) and r = -0.867 (p = 9.7 × 10–24). The polynomial regression analysis between CO and SVR and between CI and SVRI showed more significant results, respectively: R2 = 0.828 (p = 1.8 × 10–27) and R2 = 0.805 (p = 1.2 × 10–25).

Conclusions

In conclusion, the present study showed that the bedside POCUS approach supports an advanced clinical examination with significant advantages for the frail comorbid patients, since it is accurate, less expensive, repeatable and not invasive.