Cited by 7Hemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyCongenital Heart Disease StudiesNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring

Cardiac output monitoring in paediatric cardiac surgery: A review

Woodman, Hannah M., Lee, Corlyn, Ahmed, Ayesha N., Malik, Bassit A., Mellor, Sophie, Brown, Louise J., Gentle, Leanne, Harky, Amer·2021·Cardiology in the Young

Abstract

The aim of this review is to present the current options for cardiac output (CO) monitoring in children undergoing cardiac surgery. Current technologies for monitoring identified were a range of invasive, minimally invasive, and non-invasive technologies. These include pulmonary artery catheter, transoesophageal echocardiography, pulse contour analysis, electrical cardiography, and thoracic bioreactance. A literature search was conducted using evidence databases which identified two current guidelines; the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde guideline and Royal College of Anaesthetics Guideline. These were appraised using the AGREE II tool and the evidence identified was used to create an overview summary of each technological option for CO monitoring. There is limited evidence regarding the accuracy of modalities available for CO monitoring in paediatric patients during cardiac surgery. Each technology has advantages and disadvantages; however, none could be championed as the most beneficial. Furthermore, a gold standard for CO monitoring has not yet been identified for paediatric populations, nor is it apparent whether one modality is preferable based on the available evidence. Additional evidence using a standardised method for comparing CO measurements should be conducted in order to determine the best option for CO monitoring in paediatrics. Furthermore, cost-effectiveness assessment of each modality should be conducted. Only then will it be possible for clear, evidence-based guidance to be written.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1047951120004680

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Woodman, H. M., Lee, C., Ahmed, A. N., Malik, B. A., Mellor, S., Brown, L. J., Gentle, L., & Harky, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Alder Hey Children's Hospital (GB)
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
Corresponding author
Harky, Amer
Venue
Cardiology in the Young
Published
2021-01
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
23-30
ISSN
  • 1047-9511 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-1107
OpenAlex
W3118705443
Cited by
7
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cardiology in the Young (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Keywords
cardiac output monitoring, pediatric cardiac surgery, pulmonary artery catheter, transesophageal echocardiography, pulse contour analysis, non-invasive monitoring, monitoring accuracy, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Cardiac Output, Child, Cardiac Surgical Procedures, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Pediatrics, Thermodilution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review