2005
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.04044.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measured pulmonary oxygen consumption: difference between systemic oxygen uptake measured by the reverse Fick method and indirect calorimetry in cardiac surgery

Abstract: SummaryMeasurement of oxygen uptake by indirect calorimetry was compared with the reverse Fick method in a series of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Oxygen uptake measurements for indirect calorimetry were made using a calibrated measurement system utilizing the Haldane transformation in a simple semiclosed breathing system based upon a modified Bain circuit. Pulmonary blood flow for the reverse Fick method was measured using bolus thermodilution. The results were (mean [standard deviation]): indirect cal… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
11
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
2
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite these concerns, the reverse Fick method provides a useful standard to assess bias and accuracy in another method provided that a large enough series of data is collected to reduce the standard error of the mean, and an allowance is made for the presence of lung tissue uptake, which is not measured by the reverse Fick approach. Calculation of the mean bias of 13.5% found in this current study is consistent with values measured by previous workers 14,[25][26][27] . This has been attributed to lung tissue uptake of O 2 , although another likely contributing factor is net elimination of N 2 by the body.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Despite these concerns, the reverse Fick method provides a useful standard to assess bias and accuracy in another method provided that a large enough series of data is collected to reduce the standard error of the mean, and an allowance is made for the presence of lung tissue uptake, which is not measured by the reverse Fick approach. Calculation of the mean bias of 13.5% found in this current study is consistent with values measured by previous workers 14,[25][26][27] . This has been attributed to lung tissue uptake of O 2 , although another likely contributing factor is net elimination of N 2 by the body.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The standard deviation (SD) in their study at a similar FiO 2 was 28 ml.min -1 compared to our own SD of 31 ml.min -1 when comparing the M-COVX with the standard Haldane method. This level of precision is typical of studies comparing different methods for measurement of lung gas uptake in the clinical setting 1,3,14,15 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The first is that a component of VO 2 measured by the device is the metabolic oxygen consumed by the lung itself, which would increase measured VO 2 relative to that transferred to blood in the pulmonary circulation (which is the relevant variable in Fick transport). This phenomenon may account for ~10%‐12% of measured VO 2 , and would overestimate CO in Fick O2 by the same degree that we did . Another potential source of error is the transpleural diffusive loss of oxygen through the visceral pleura in the setting of an open sternum, which would contribute to measured VO 2 but again, not part of the net oxygen uptake in the pulmonary circulation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…In all included studies, oxygen consumption was assessed either by breathing gas analysis, such as indirect calorimetry, or calculated by the reversed‐Fick method using thermodilution cardiac output by a pulmonary artery or right ventricle catheter. The reported inconsistencies between these two methodologies could be attributed to the fact that the reversed‐Fick method does not include the pulmonary oxygen consumption and may combine measurement errors of oxygen content variables . Measuring gas fractions in expired air, on the other hand, implies other difficulties.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%