A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Correlation Between Transhepatic and Subcostal Inferior Vena Cava Views to Assess Inferior Vena Cava Variation: A Pilot Study. | LitMetric

Objectives: To assess the feasibility and reliability of transthoracic echocardiography to measure inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter variation using a transhepatic view.

Design: Prospective cohort study.

Setting: Single-center hospital.

Patients: Forty consecutive patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery.

Interventions: Bedside transthoracic echocardiography.

Measurements And Main Results: Correlation between the two views was measured using Pearson R, while agreement was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In a nested sub-study of 16 randomly selected participants, all images were re-rated by the same rater, who was blinded to the original measurement results, and by a second blinded operator. Correlation between the subcostal and transhepatic views was moderate when assessing maximum (R 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.68), and minimum (R 0.55; CI, 0.29-0.74) IVC diameter. Correlation when measuring IVC diameter variation was higher (R 0.70; CI, 0.49-0.83). Agreement between the two views for IVC diameter variation measurement was substantial (ICC 0.73; CI, 0.49-0.85). Intra-rater reliability was excellent (ICC 0.95-0.99).

Conclusions: Agreement between subcostal and transhepatic views was substantial for the assessment of IVC diameter variation; however, the magnitude of agreement was less than anticipated. Further research is needed to determine if the transhepatic view can be used reliably in the assessment of fluid responsiveness.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2017.02.003DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ivc diameter
20
diameter variation
16
inferior vena
12
vena cava
12
subcostal transhepatic
8
transhepatic views
8
correlation
5
views
5
variation
5
ivc
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!