OBJECTIVETo study the accuracy of pulse contour cardiac output (PCCO) during blood volume change.

METHODSHemorrhagic shock model was made in twenty dogs followed by volume resuscitation. Two PiCCO catheters were placed into each model to monitor the cardiac output (CO). One of catheters was used to calibrate CO by transpulmonary thermodilution technique (COTP) (calibration group), and the other one was used to calibrate PCCO (none-calibration group). In the hemorrhage phase, calibration was carried out each time when the blood volume dropped by 5 percents in the calibration group until the hemorrhage volume reached to 40 percent of the basic blood volume. Continuous monitor was done in the none-calibration group.Volume resuscitation phase started after re-calibration in the two groups. Calibration was carried out each time when the blood equivalent rose by 5 percents in calibration group until the percentage of blood equivalent volume returned back to 100. Continuous monitor was done in none-calibration group. COTP, PCCO, mean arterial pressure (MAP), systemic circulation resistance (SVR), global enddiastolic volume (GEDV) were recorded respectively in each time point.

RESULTS(1) At the baseline, COTP in calibration group showed no statistic difference compared with PCCO in none-calibration group (P >0.05). (2) In the hemorrhage phase, COTP and GEDV in calibration group decreased gradually, and reached to the minimum value (1.06 ± 0.57) L/min, (238 ± 93) ml respectively at TH8. SVR in calibration group increased gradually, and reached to the maximum value (5 074 ± 2 342) dyn · s · cm⁻⁵ at TH6. However, PCCO and SVR in none-calibration group decreased in a fluctuating manner, and reached to the minimum value (2.42 ± 1.37) L/min, (2 285 ± 1 033) dyn · s · cm⁻⁵ respectively at TH8. COTP in the calibration group showed a significant statistic difference compared with PCCO in the none-calibration group at each time point (At TH1-8, t values were respectively -5.218, -5.495, -4.639, -6.588, -6.029, -5.510, -5.763 and -5.755, all P < 0.01). From TH1 to TH8, the difference in percentage increased gradually. There were statistic differences in SVR at each time point between the two groups (At TH1 and TH4, t values were respectively 2.866 and 2.429, both P < 0.05, at TH2 - TH3 and TH5 - TH8, t values were respectively 3.073, 3.590, 6.847, 8.425, 6.910 and 8.799, all P < 0.01). There was no statistic difference in MAP between the two groups (P > 0.05). (3) In the volume resuscitation phase, COTP and GEDV in the calibration group increased gradually. GEDV reached to the maximum value ((394±133) ml) at TR7, and COTP reached to the maximum value (3.15 ± 1.42) L/min at TR8. SVR in the calibration group decreased gradually, and reached to the minimum value (3 284 ± 1 271) dyn · s · cm⁻⁵ at TR8. However, PCCO and SVR in the none-calibration group increased in a fluctuating manner. SVR reached to the maximum value (8 589 ± 4 771) dyn · s · cm⁻⁵ at TR7, and PCCO reached to the maximum value (1.35 ± 0.70) L/min at TR8. COTP in the calibration group showed a significant statistic difference compared with PCCO in the none-calibration group at each time point (At TR1-8, t values were respectively 8.195, 8.703, 7.903, 8.266, 9.600, 8.340, 8.938, 8.332, all P < 0.01). From TR1 to TR8, the difference in percentage increased gradually. There were statistic differences in SVR at each time point between the two groups (At TR1, t value was -2.810, P < 0.05, at TR2-8, t values were respectively -6.026, -6.026, -5.375, -6.008, -5.406, -5.613 and -5.609, all P < 0.05). There was no statistic difference in MAP between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONPCCO could not reflect the real CO in case of rapid blood volume change, which resulting in the misjudgment of patient's condition. In clinical practice, more frequent calibrations should be done to maintain the accuracy of PCCO in rapid blood volume change cases.