Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
NARROW
Format
Article Type
Date
Availability
1-1 of 1
Michela CAUTERO
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Articles
Enrico TAM, Marcel AZABJI KENFACK, Michela CAUTERO, Federic LADOR, Guglielmo ANTONUTTO, Pietro Enrico DI PRAMPERO, Guido FERRETTI, Carlo CAPELLI
Journal:
Clinical Science
Clin Sci (Lond) (2004) 106 (4): 371–376.
Published: 01 April 2004
Abstract
The beat-by-beat non-invasive assessment of cardiac output (Q, litre·min -1 ) based on the arterial pulse pressure analysis called Modelflow® can be a very useful tool for quantifying the cardiovascular adjustments occurring in exercising humans. Q was measured in nine young subjects at rest and during steady-state cycling exercise performed at 50, 100, 150 and 200 W by using Modelflow® applied to the Portapres® non-invasive pulse wave (Q Modelflow ) and by means of the open-circuit acetylene uptake (Q C 2 H 2 ). Q values were correlated linearly ( r =0.784), but Bland–Altman analysis revealed that mean Q Modelflow -Q C 2 H 2 difference (bias) was equal to 1.83 litre·min -1 with an S.D. (precision) of 4.11 litre·min -1 , and 95% limits of agreement were relatively large, i.e. from -6.23 to +9.89 litre·min -1 . Q Modelflow values were then multiplied by individual calibrating factors obtained by dividing Q C 2 H 2 by Q Modelflow for each subject measured at 150 W to obtain corrected Q Modelflow (Q corrected ) values. Q corrected values were compared with the corresponding Q C 2 H 2 values, with values at 150 W ignored. Data were correlated linearly ( r =0.931) and were not significantly different. The bias and precision were found to be 0.24 litre·min -1 and 3.48 litre·min -1 respectively, and 95% limits of agreement ranged from -6.58 to +7.05 litre·min -1 . In conclusion, after correction by an independent method, Modelflow® was found to be a reliable and accurate procedure for measuring Q in humans at rest and exercise, and it can be proposed for routine purposes.