2020
DOI: 10.12669/pjms.36.4.2032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of cardiac output, IVC diameters and lactate levels in prediction of mortality in patients in emergency department; An observational study

Abstract: Objective: Fluid overload is an independent marker for mortality in critically ill patients. Assessment of fluid status and fluid responsiveness is crucial for the management of these patients. In this study, we compared the lactate level, inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter and non-invasive cardiac output (CO) monitoring in prediction of mortality in emergency department. Methods: This was a cross sectional observational study which comprised of 68 patients and was performed in ED of Tabriz University of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 28 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Other continuous means of estimating CI and measures of effective cardiac function at the patient bedside include cerebral/somatic near infrared spectroscopy (Hansen et al 2022 ), central venous pressure (Liu et al 2016 ), as well as physiologic markers such as heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure, capillary refill, urine output, and arterial lactate levels (Lazzeri et al 2015 , Shahsavarinia et al 2020 , Patel et al 2022 , Yu et al 2022 ). These routine monitoring systems and values to assess CI do not independently have a strong correlation with a patient’s CI or hemodynamic status (Marik et al 2008 , Sevransky 2009 , Bhalala et al 2012 , Bakker 2016 , Engoren et al 2017 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other continuous means of estimating CI and measures of effective cardiac function at the patient bedside include cerebral/somatic near infrared spectroscopy (Hansen et al 2022 ), central venous pressure (Liu et al 2016 ), as well as physiologic markers such as heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure, capillary refill, urine output, and arterial lactate levels (Lazzeri et al 2015 , Shahsavarinia et al 2020 , Patel et al 2022 , Yu et al 2022 ). These routine monitoring systems and values to assess CI do not independently have a strong correlation with a patient’s CI or hemodynamic status (Marik et al 2008 , Sevransky 2009 , Bhalala et al 2012 , Bakker 2016 , Engoren et al 2017 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%