» Articles » PMID: 7588904

Assumed Oxygen Consumption Based on Calculation from Dye Dilution Cardiac Output: an Improved Formula

Overview
Journal Eur Heart J
Date 1995 May 1
PMID 7588904
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study was performed because of observed differences between dye dilution cardiac output and the Fick cardiac output, calculated from estimated oxygen consumption according to LaFarge and Miettinen, and to find a better formula for assumed oxygen consumption. In 250 patients who underwent left and right heart catheterization, the oxygen consumption VO2 (ml.min-1) was calculated using Fick's principle. Either pulmonary or systemic flow, as measured by dye dilution, was used in combination with the concordant arteriovenous oxygen concentration difference. In 130 patients, who matched the age of the LaFarge and Miettinen population, the obtained values of oxygen consumption VO2(dd) were compared with the estimated oxygen consumption values VO2(lfm), found using the LaFarge and Miettinen formulae. The VO2(lfm) was significantly lower than VO2(dd); -21.8 +/- 29.3 ml.min-1 (mean +/- SD), P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -26.9 to -16.7, limits of agreement (LA) -80.4 to 36.9. A new regression formula for the assumed oxygen consumption VO2(ass) was derived in 250 patients by stepwise multiple regression analysis. The VO2(dd) was used as a dependent variable, and body surface area BSA (m2). Sex (0 for female, 1 for male), Age (years), Heart rate (min-1) and the presence of a left to right shunt as independent variables. The best fitting formula is expressed as: VO2(ass) = (157.3 x BSA + 10.0 x Sex - 10.5 x In Age + 4.8) ml.min-1, where ln Age = the natural logarithm of the age. This formula was validated prospectively in 60 patients. A non-significant difference between VO2(ass) and VO2(dd) was found; mean 2.0 +/- 23.4 ml.min-1, P = 0.771, 95% Cl = -4.0 to +8.0, LA -44.7 to +48.7. In conclusion, assumed oxygen consumption values, using our new formula, are in better agreement with the actual values than those found according to LaFarge and Miettinen's formulae.

Citing Articles

Differences in Direct Fick and Thermodilution Measurements of Cardiac Output: Impact on Pulmonary Hypertension Classification.

Hamilton G, Fletcher L, Harley W, Azzopardi R, Chan R, Fulcher J Pulm Circ. 2025; 15(1):e70053.

PMID: 40017790 PMC: 11865337. DOI: 10.1002/pul2.70053.


Prognostic Significance of Hemodynamics in Patients With Transposition of the Great Arteries and Systemic Right Ventricle.

Aldweib N, Deghani P, Broberg C, van Dissel A, Altibi A, Wong J Circ Heart Fail. 2024; 17(9):e011882.

PMID: 39206568 PMC: 11408092. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.124.011882.


Could Impedance Cardiography be a Non-Invasive Alternative Method of Measuring Cardiac Output in Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension?.

Yagmur B, Simsek E, Kayikcioglu M, Yuce E, Bayazit Candemir Y, Nalbantgil S Anatol J Cardiol. 2023; 27(11):650-656.

PMID: 37466025 PMC: 10621604. DOI: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2023.2820.


Accuracy of VO estimation according to the widely used Krakau formula for the prediction of cardiac output.

Reiter T, Kerzner J, Fette G, Frantz S, Voelker W, Ertl G Herz. 2023; 49(1):50-59.

PMID: 37439804 PMC: 10830659. DOI: 10.1007/s00059-023-05196-0.


Comparison between Cardiac Output and Pulmonary Vascular Pressure Measured by Indirect Fick and Thermodilution Methods.

Volodarsky I, Kerzhner K, Haberman D, Cuciuc V, Poles L, Blatt A J Pers Med. 2023; 13(3).

PMID: 36983740 PMC: 10054496. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13030559.