alexa Comparison of intravenous and pulmonary artery injections of hypertonic saline for the assessment of conductance catheter parallel conductance.
Cardiology

Cardiology

Journal of Clinical & Experimental Cardiology

Author(s): Steendijk P, Baan J

Abstract Share this page

Abstract OBJECTIVE: The conductance catheter provides a continuous measure of left ventricular volume. Conversion of raw data to calibrated absolute volume requires assessment of parallel conductance. Conventionally, parallel conductance is determined by injecting a small bolus hypertonic saline into the pulmonary artery and analyzing the signal obtained during passage of the bolus through the left ventricle. However, in some cases, a pulmonary artery catheter is not practicable. Therefore, we investigated whether intravenous hypertonic saline injections yield reliable parallel conductance estimates. METHODS: In 13 anesthetized sheep (33+/-5 kg) parallel conductance was obtained by pulmonary artery and by intravenous injections. Measurements (triplicate) were done at baseline, during dobutamine and pacing, and repeated after embolization of the right coronary artery in order to assess the effects of enlarged right ventricular volumes. We used a multiple linear regression model to determine the relation between parallel conductance obtained by the two methods and to quantify the effects of dobutamine, pacing, and embolization. RESULTS: The two methods show an excellent correlation with a systematic overestimation for intravenous injection. The mean parallel conductance obtained by pulmonary artery injection was 0.690+/-0.009 ohm(-1) whereas intravenous injection yielded 0.739+/-0.015 ohm(-1). Interanimal variability was 0.138 ohm(-1). The difference between the two methods was relatively small, but highly significant (+0.049+/-0.012 ohm(-1), P<0.001). Embolization resulted in significantly higher values (+0.141+/-0.017 ohm(-1), P<0.001), but dobutamine and pacing did not significantly affect parallel conductance (+0.021+/-0.016 ohm(-1), NS). There was no interaction between these interventions and the injection method, indicating that the relation between parallel conductances obtained by the two methods was maintained in all conditions. CONCLUSION: Parallel conductance obtained by intravenous injection was significantly higher (+7\%) than by pulmonary artery injection. However, the relation between the two methods is highly linear with an excellent correlation and is not affected by large hemodynamic changes. The systematic difference between the two methods is likely due to increased conductivity of blood in the right ventricle which is present with intravenous injection but not with pulmonary artery injection. Determination of parallel conductance by intravenous injection is a good alternative for conventional pulmonary artery injection and may be applied in studies where pulmonary artery injection is problematic. This may include studies in very small animals or studies in patients prone to arrhythmias or with cardiac anomalies such as pulmonary artery stenosis. In addition, intravenous injection could be used in biventricular studies to obtain right and left ventricular parallel conductances from a single saline injection.
This article was published in Cardiovasc Res and referenced in Journal of Clinical & Experimental Cardiology

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri, Food, Aqua and Veterinary Science Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Clinical and Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Earth & Environmental Sciences

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science and Health care Journals

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics and Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Informatics Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Material Sciences Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Mathematics and Physics Journals

Jim Willison

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

John Behannon

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords