Dye dilution was compared with pulsed doppler for the measurement of cardiac output in eighteen children being ventilated after cardiac surgery. The mean difference between the two techniques was -0.04 l/min (dye minus doppler) with 95% confidence limits of 0.25 l/min and -0.33 l/min over a cardiac output range 0.27–6.12 l/min; this difference is not significant. Calculation of the product-moment correlation coefficient showed a close relationship between the dye dilution and doppler methods with r = 0.97. Pulsed doppler is a new noninvasive technique that can be used instead of dye dilution for the measurement of cardiac output in co-operative or anaesthetised children.
HuntsmanLL, StewartDK, BarnesSR, FranklinSB, ColocousisJS, HesselEA.Noninvasive doppler estimation of cardiac output in man.Circulation1983; 67:593–602.
2.
IhlenH, AmlieJP, DaleJet al.Determination of cardiac output by doppler echocardiography. Br Heart J1984; 51:54–60.
3.
ChandraratnaPA, NannaM, McKayCet al.Determination of cardiac output by transcutaneous continuous-wave ultrasonic doppler computer. Am J Cardiol1984; 53:234–237.
4.
RoseJS, NannaM, RahimtoolaSH, ElkayamU, McKayC, ChandraratnaPAN.Accuracy of determination of changes in cardiac output by transcutaneous continuous-wave doppler computer.Am J Cardiol1984; 54:1094–1101.
5.
VandenbogaerdeJF, ScheldewaertRG, RijckaertDL, ClementDL, ColardynFA.Comparison between ultrasonic and thermodilution cardiac output measurements in intensive care patients.Crit Care Med1986; 14:294–297.
6.
AlversonDC, EldridgeM, DillonT, YabekSM, BermanW.Noninvasive pulsed doppler determination of cardiac output in neonates and children.J Pediatr1982; 101:46–50.
7.
ReinAJJT, HsiehKS, ElixsonMet al.Cardiac output estimates in the pediatric intensive care unit using a continuous-wave doppler computer: validation and limitations of the technique. Am Heart J1986; 112:97–102.
8.
WaltherFJ, SiassiB, RamadanNA, AnandaAK, WuPYK.Pulsed doppler determination of cardiac output in neonates: normal standards for clinical use.Pediatrics1985; 76:829–833.
9.
BlandJM, AltmanDG.Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.Lancet1986; 1:307–310.
10.
GreenfieldJC, PatelDJ.Relation between pressure and diameter in the ascending aorta of man.Circ Res1962; 10:778–781.
11.
GussenhovenWJ, Van LeenenBF, KuisW, De VilleneuveVH, BomN, Van Meurs-Van WoezikH.Comparison of internal diameter of great arteries in congenital heart disease.Br Heart J1983; 49:45–50.
12.
SahnDJ, DemariaA, KissloJ, WeymanA.Recommendations regarding quantitation in M-mode echocardiography: results of a survey of echocardiographic measurements.Circulation1978; 58:1072–1083.
13.
LevettJM, ReplogleRL.Thermodilution cardiac output: a critical analysis and review of the literature.J Surg Res1979; 27:392–404.
14.
MaruschakGF, PotterAM, SchaubleJF, RogersMC.Overestimation of pediatric cardiac output by thermal indicator loss.Circulation1982; 65:380–383.
