↓ Skip to main content

Clinical monitoring of cardiac output assessed by transoesophageal echocardiography in anaesthetised dogs: a comparison with the thermodilution technique

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Clinical monitoring of cardiac output assessed by transoesophageal echocardiography in anaesthetised dogs: a comparison with the thermodilution technique
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-1227-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matheus M. Mantovani, Denise T. Fantoni, André M. Gimenes, Jacqueline R. de Castro, Patrícia B. Flor, Keila K. Ida, Denise S. Schwartz, Mantovani, MM, Fantoni, DT, Gimenes, AM, Castro, JR, Flor, BP, Ida, Keila, Schwartz, DS

Abstract

Cardiac output (CO) is an important haemodynamic parameter to monitor in patients during surgery. However, the majority of the techniques for measuring CO have a limited application in veterinary practice due to their invasive approach and associated complexity and risks. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is a technique used to monitor cardiac function in human patients during surgical procedures and allows CO to be measured non-invasively. This prospective clinical study aimed to compare the transoesophageal echocardiography using a transgastric view of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and the thermodilution (TD) technique for the assessment of CO during mean arterial pressure of 65-80 mmHg (normotension) and <65 mmHg (hypotension) in dogs undergoing elective surgery. Eight dogs were pre-medicated with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg, IM), tramadol (4 mg/kg, IM) and atropine (0.03 mg/kg, IM), followed by anaesthetic induction with propofol (3-5 mg/kg IV) and maintenance with isoflurane associated with a continuous infusion rate of fentanyl (bolus of 3 μg/kg followed by 0.3 μg/kg/min). The CO was measured by TEE (COTEE) and TD (COTD) at the end of expiration during normotension and hypotension (induced by isoflurane). There was a strong positive correlation between COTEE and COTD ​​(r = 0.925; P < 0.0001). The bias between COTD and COTEE was 0.14 ± 0.29 L/min (limits of agreement, -0.44 to 0.72 L/min). The percentage error of CO measured by the two methods was 12.32%. In addition, a strong positive correlation was found between COTEE and COTD during normotension (r = 0.995; P < 0.0001) and hypotension (r = 0.78; P = 0.0223). The results of this study indicated that the transgastric view of the LVOT by TEE was a minimally invasive alternative to clinically monitoring CO in dogs during anaesthesia. However, during hypotension, the CO obtained by TEE was less reliable, although still acceptable.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 28%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Postgraduate 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2018.
All research outputs
#10,023,019
of 13,110,606 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,040
of 1,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,278
of 310,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#83
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,110,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,895 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.