Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure and central venous pressure fail to predict ventricular filling volume, cardiac performance, or the response to volume infusion in normal subjects

By Anand Kumar, Ramon L Añel, E. Bunnell, Kalim J. Habet, S. Zanotti, S. Marshall, A. Neumann, Amjad Ali, M. Cheang, C. Kavinsky and 1 more. Critical Care Medicine, 2004

776 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Epidemiology, Surgery

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e6e601e9f4fcc134bb5af8161e19e909b5659a5b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

1. P. Marik

In Epidemiology

1. P. Marik
2. R. Cavallazzi
3. X. Monnet
4. D. Osman
5. N. Anguel
6. C. Richard
7. A. Hirani
8. T. Vasu

In Surgery

1. P. Marik
2. R. Cavallazzi
3. X. Monnet
4. D. Osman
5. N. Anguel
6. C. Richard
7. T. Vasu
8. A. Hirani

Citations in the corpus

• Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge* (2007, background): “It is interesting to note that even in healthy volunteers, PAOP and central venous pressure have been reported as poor markers of preload responsiveness (19).”
• Does the Central Venous Pressure Predict Fluid Responsiveness? An Updated Meta-Analysis and a Plea for Some Common Sense* (2013, background): “Kumar et al (65) 2007 Healthy volunteer 12 Echocardiography N Various 3,000 Crystalloid 0.”
• Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review of the literature* (2009, background): “In normal individuals, an increase in preload (volume loading) is associated with a significant increase in SV (61).”