Advertisement

Cardiac Output

  • Daniel H. Katz
  • Frederick HeuplerJr.
  • Marwa A. SabeEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Cardiology book series (CONCARD)

Abstract

Cardiac output is the product of stroke volume and heart rate and is normally 5–6 L/min. Stroke volume, and thus cardiac output, is influenced by preload, afterload, and contractility. Decreased cardiac output (CO) may lead to increased morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients, and thus methods to measure CO are important in the clinical setting. Hemodynamic parameters, including CO, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, and systemic vascular resistance (SVR), are important in the assessment of the various forms of shock. Cardiogenic shock is a low output, elevated filling pressure state. Close attention to noninvasive and invasive hemodynamic parameters is essential to guiding adequate and appropriate therapeutic management in critically ill patients. There are noninvasive and invasive methods of measuring CO. Noninvasive methods include clinical parameters and echocardiography. The most commonly used invasive methods, thermodilution and Fick methods, require insertion of a Swan-Ganz catheter into the right heart and pulmonary artery.

Keywords

Output Swan-Ganz Catheter Shock Thermodilution Fick 

References

  1. 1.
    Fuster R, O’Rourke R, Walsh R, Poole-Wilson P. Hurst’s the heart. 12th ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lilly L. Pathophysiology of heart disease. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2003. p. 61, 213–4.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braunwald E, Libby P, Bonow R, Mann D, Zipes D. Braunwald’s heart disease. 18th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2008. p. 452–5.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boron W, Boulpaep E. Textbook of medical physiology. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2009.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hall J, Schmidt G, Kress J. Principles of critical care. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2015.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stevenson LW, Perloff JK. The limited reliability of physical signs for estimating hemodynamics in chronic heart failure. JAMA. 1989;261:884–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marino P. The ICU book. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014. p. 135–50, 239–262Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dupont H, Squara P. Cardiac output monitoring. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 1996;9:490–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nohria A, Lewis E, Stevenson LW. Medical management of advanced heart failure. JAMA. 2002;287(5):628–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mohammed I, Phillips C. Determining cardiac output in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Clin. 2010;26:355–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller R. Miller’s anesthesia. 7th ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2010.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siegel LC, Hennessy MM, Pearl RG. Delayed time response of the continuous cardiac output pulmonary artery catheter. Anesth Analg. 1996;83:1173–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Longo DL, Fauc AS, Kasper DL, Hauser SL, Jameson JL, Loscalto J, editors. Harrijan’s principles of internal medicine. 18th ed. New York: McGraw–Hill; 2012.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sakka SG, Ruhl CC, Pfeiffer UJ, et al. Assessment of cardiac preload and extravascular lung water by single transpulmonary thermodilution. Intensive Care Med. 2000;26(2):180–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Suggested Reading

  1. Zipes D, Libby P, Bonow R, Mann D, Tomaselli G, editors. Braunwald’s heart disease: a textbook of cardiovascular medicine. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019. p. 418–61.Google Scholar
  2. Vincent JL, Abraham E, Moore F, Kochanek P, Fink M. Textbook of critical care. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2017. p. 617–36.Google Scholar
  3. Hall J, Schmidt G, Kress J. Principles of critical care. 4th ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc; 2015.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel H. Katz
    • 1
  • Frederick HeuplerJr.
    • 2
  • Marwa A. Sabe
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Beth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterBostonUSA
  2. 2.Cleveland ClinicClevelandUSA
  3. 3.Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations