TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative utility of centrally versus peripherally transduced venous pressure monitoring in the perioperative period in spine surgery patients
AU - Bombardieri, Anna Maria
AU - Beckman, James
AU - Shaw, Pamela
AU - Girardi, Federico P.
AU - Ma, Yan
AU - Memtsoudis, Stavros G.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported in part by the Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital for Special Surgery and by a grant to Yan MA, PhD, from the Clinical Translational Science Center (CTSC; NIH UL1-RR024996).
PY - 2012/11
Y1 - 2012/11
N2 - Study Objective: To compare central venous pressure (CVP) with peripheral venous pressure (PVP) monitoring during the intraoperative and postoperative periods in patients undergoing spine surgery. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: University-affiliated teaching hospital. Patients: 35 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients. Interventions: A peripheral catheter in the forearm or hand and a central catheter into the internal jugular vein were placed for PVP and CVP monitoring, respectively. Measurements: CVP and PVP values were collected simultaneously and recorded electronically at 5-minute intervals throughout surgery and in the recovery room. The number of attempts for catheter placement, ease of use, maintenance, and interpretation were recorded. Patient comfort, frequency of complications, and cost were analyzed. Main results: The correlation coefficient between CVP and PVP was 0.650 in the operating room (P < 0.0001) and 0.388 in the recovery room (P < 0.0001). There was no difference between groups in number of attempts to place either catheter, maintenance, and interpretation with respect to PVP and CVP monitoring in the operating room. In the recovery room, the nurses reported a higher level of difficulty in interpretation of PVP than CVP, but no differences were noted in ease of maintenance. There were no complications related to either central or peripheral catheter placement. Patient comfort and cost efficiency were higher with a peripheral than a central catheter. Conclusion: During clinically relevant conditions, there was limited correlation between PVP and CVP in the prone position during surgery and postoperatively in the recovery room.
AB - Study Objective: To compare central venous pressure (CVP) with peripheral venous pressure (PVP) monitoring during the intraoperative and postoperative periods in patients undergoing spine surgery. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: University-affiliated teaching hospital. Patients: 35 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients. Interventions: A peripheral catheter in the forearm or hand and a central catheter into the internal jugular vein were placed for PVP and CVP monitoring, respectively. Measurements: CVP and PVP values were collected simultaneously and recorded electronically at 5-minute intervals throughout surgery and in the recovery room. The number of attempts for catheter placement, ease of use, maintenance, and interpretation were recorded. Patient comfort, frequency of complications, and cost were analyzed. Main results: The correlation coefficient between CVP and PVP was 0.650 in the operating room (P < 0.0001) and 0.388 in the recovery room (P < 0.0001). There was no difference between groups in number of attempts to place either catheter, maintenance, and interpretation with respect to PVP and CVP monitoring in the operating room. In the recovery room, the nurses reported a higher level of difficulty in interpretation of PVP than CVP, but no differences were noted in ease of maintenance. There were no complications related to either central or peripheral catheter placement. Patient comfort and cost efficiency were higher with a peripheral than a central catheter. Conclusion: During clinically relevant conditions, there was limited correlation between PVP and CVP in the prone position during surgery and postoperatively in the recovery room.
KW - Central venous pressure
KW - Correlation study
KW - Peripheral venous pressure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867841159&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinane.2012.03.005
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinane.2012.03.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 22999983
AN - SCOPUS:84867841159
SN - 0952-8180
VL - 24
SP - 542
EP - 548
JO - Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
JF - Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
IS - 7
ER -