The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relation between respiratory variations in pulse oximetry plethysmographic waveform amplitude and arterial pulse pressure in ventilated patients
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: Respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure is a reliable predictor of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients with circulatory failure. The main limitation of this method is that it requires an invasive arterial catheter. Both arterial and pulse oximetry plethysmographic waveforms depend on stroke volume. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the relationship between respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure and respiratory variation in pulse oximetry plethysmographic (POP) waveform amplitude. Method: This prospective clinical investigation was conducted in 22 mechanically ventilated patients. Respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure and respiratory variation in POP waveform amplitude were recorded simultaneously in a beat-to-beat evaluation, and were compared using a Spearman correlation test and a Bland–Altman analysis. Results: There was a strong correlation (r 2 = 0.83; P < 0.001) and a good agreement (bias = 0.8 ± 3.5%) between respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure and respiratory variation in POP waveform amplitude. A respiratory variation in POP waveform amplitude value above 15% allowed discrimination between patients with respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure above 13% and those with variation of 13% or less (positive predictive value 100%). Conclusion: Respiratory variation in arterial pulse pressure above 13% can be accurately predicted by a respiratory variation in POP waveform amplitude above 15%. This index has potential applications in patients who are not instrumented with an intra-arterial catheter.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Cecconi, M., De Backer, D., Antonelli, M., Beale, R., Bakker, J., Hofer, C., Jaeschke, R., Mebazaa, A., Pinsky, M. R., Teboul, J. L., et al. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3525-z · Cited by 1,767
Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy
Marik, P. E., Monnet, X., & Teboul, J.-L. (2011) · Annals of Intensive Care · doi:10.1186/2110-5820-1-1 · Cited by 686
Methods for cleaning the BOLD fMRI signal
Caballero-Gaudes, C., & Reynolds, R. C. (2017) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.12.018 · Cited by 542
Photoplethysmography: Beyond the Calculation of Arterial Oxygen Saturation and Heart Rate
Shelley, K. H. (2007) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000269512.82836.c9 · Cited by 450
Metadata
- Authors
- Cannesson, M., Besnard, C., Durand, P. G., Bohé, J., & Jacques, D.
- Venue
- Critical Care
- Published
- 2005-08-23
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- R562-8
- ISSN
- 1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1493365134
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.