Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of aicSpringerOpen.comThis journalSubmit a manuscriptRegisterSpringerOpen.comAnnals of Intensive Care
Ann Intensive Care. 2012; 2: 26.
Published online Jul 11, 2012. doi:  10.1186/2110-5820-2-26
PMCID: PMC3425133
Can endotracheal bioimpedance cardiography assess hemodynamic response to passive leg raising following cardiac surgery?
Jean-Luc Fellahi,corresponding author1,2 Marc-Olivier Fischer,1 Audrey Dalbera,1 Massimo Massetti,2,3 Jean-Louis Gérard,1,2 and Jean-Luc Hanouz1,2
1Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, CHU de Caen, Caen, F-14000, France
2Univ Caen, Faculty of Medicine, Caen, F-14000, France
3Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, CHU de Caen, Caen, F-14000, France
corresponding authorCorresponding author.
Jean-Luc Fellahi: fellahi-jl/at/; Marc-Olivier Fischer: fischer-mo/at/; Audrey Dalbera: audrey_dalbera/at/; Massimo Massetti: massetti-m/at/; Jean-Louis Gérard: Medecine.doyen/at/; Jean-Luc Hanouz: hanouz-jl/at/
Received April 2, 2012; Accepted July 11, 2012.
The utility of endotracheal bioimpedance cardiography (ECOM) has been scarcely reported. We tested the hypothesis that it could be an alternative to pulse contour analysis for cardiac index measurement and prediction in fluid responsiveness.
Twenty-five consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit following conventional cardiac surgery were prospectively included and investigated at baseline, during passive leg raising, and after fluid challenge. Comparative cardiac index data points were collected from pulse contour analysis (CIPC) and ECOM (CIECOM). Correlations were determined by linear regression. Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare the bias, precision, and limits of agreement. Percentage error was calculated. Changes in CIPC (ΔCIPC) and CIECOM (ΔCIECOM) during passive leg raising were collected to assess their discrimination in predicting fluid responsiveness.
A significant relationship was found between CIPC and CIECOM (r = 0.45; P < 0.001). Bias, precision, and limits of agreement were 0.44 L.min-1.m-2 (95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.56), 0.59 L.min-1.m-2, and −0.73 to 1.62 L.min-1.m-2, respectively. Percentage error was 45%. A significant relationship was found between percent changes in CIPC and CIECOM after fluid challenge (r = 0.42; P = 0.035). Areas under the ROC curves for ΔCIPC and ΔCIECOM to predict fluid responsiveness were 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.5–0.88) and 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.94), respectively.
ECOM is not interchangeable with pulse contour analysis but seems consistent to monitor cardiac index continuously and could help to predict fluid responsiveness by using passive leg raising.
Keywords: Cardiac surgery, Cardiac monitoring, Bioimpedance cardiography, Passive leg raising, Fluid responsiveness
Articles from Annals of Intensive Care are provided here courtesy of