Cited by 167Hemodynamic Monitoring and TherapySepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 111 of the 111 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effective hemodynamic monitoring

Open access

Abstract

Hemodynamic monitoring is the centerpiece of patient monitoring in acute care settings. Its effectiveness in terms of improved patient outcomes is difficult to quantify. This review focused on effectiveness of monitoring-linked resuscitation strategies from: (1) process-specific monitoring that allows for non-specific prevention of new onset cardiovascular insufficiency (CVI) in perioperative care. Such goal-directed therapy is associated with decreased perioperative complications and length of stay in high-risk surgery patients. (2) Patient-specific personalized resuscitation approaches for CVI. These approaches including dynamic measures to define volume responsiveness and vasomotor tone, limiting less fluid administration and vasopressor duration, reduced length of care. (3) Hemodynamic monitoring to predict future CVI using machine learning approaches. These approaches presently focus on predicting hypotension. Future clinical trials assessing hemodynamic monitoring need to focus on process-specific monitoring based on modifying therapeutic interventions known to improve patient-centered outcomes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13054-022-04173-z

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • CRT is frequently used at the bedside due to its simplicity, noninvasiveness, rapidness, low cost, and good interobserver reliability.

    “Even though it does not provide direct information about cardiac output, CRT is frequently used at the bedside due to its simplicity, noninvasiveness, rapidness, low cost, and good interobserver reliability [23].”

    From Trends and Challenges in Noninvasive Hemodynamic Monitoring of Neonates Following Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review (2025) · cites this paper as [23]

    In “Defining circulatory sufficiency” (page unavailable), the paper calls CRT costless and universally available, says it is easily taught, and reports good consistency across observers when measurement is standardized. It does not establish that CRT is frequently used at the bedside for all the stated reasons; its reference to fast recovery concerns the measured response after resuscitation, not how quickly the test can be performed. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CRT has been validated as a rapid response marker during septic shock resuscitation and is considered useful for evaluating the effectiveness of fluid therapy or vasoactive medication.

    “CRT has been validated as a rapid response marker during septic shock resuscitation and is considered useful for evaluating the effectiveness of fluid therapy or vasoactive medication [23].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Pinsky, M. R., Cecconi, M., Chew, M. S., De Backer, D., Douglas, I., Edwards, M., Hamzaoui, O., Hernandez, G., Martin, G., Monnet, X., Saugel, B., Scheeren, T. W. L., Teboul, J.-L., & Vincent, J.-L.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Humanitas University (IT)
  • Linköping University (SE)
  • Denver Health Medical Center (US)
  • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Université Paris-Saclay (FR)
  • Grady Memorial Hospital (US)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
Corresponding author
Pinsky, Michael R.
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2022-09-28
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
294-294
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4297495158
Cited by
167
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 1
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Critical Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DiVA (Linkoping University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
NHLBI (HL141916)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
hemodynamic monitoring, goal-directed therapy, cardiovascular insufficiency, perioperative care, fluid resuscitation, fluid responsiveness, vascular tone, vasopressors, hypotension prediction, machine learning, patient outcomes
MeSH terms
Hemodynamic Monitoring, Critical Care, Humans, Resuscitation, Treatment Outcome, Perioperative Care

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