2000Hypertension in PregnancyOpen access

LACK OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL VENOUS PRESSURE AND PULMONARY CAPILLARY WEDGE PRESSURE IN PREECLAMPSIA

Antoinette C. Bolte, Gustaaf Dekker, Jim van Eyck, Rob Strack van Schijndel, Herman P. van Geijn

Open full text 53 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To establish if agreement exists between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) measurements in severe hypertension in pregnancy as analyzed by tests of bias, precision, and 95% limits of agreement. METHODS: In a prospective study, CVP and PCWP data in 30 patients were collected by means of a pulmonary artery catheter from initiation of therapy until delivery. Patients with a diastolic blood pressure of more than 110 mm Hg were included. Correlation and agreement between CVP and PCWP before and after treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: The correlation coefficient (r) for CVP-PCWP data in 30 untreated patients was r = 0.64 (p = 0.0002) and for 256 pairs of posttreatment data, it was r = 0.53 (p < 0.0001). Linear regression and correlation for each individual patient in 29 patients with more than 3 measurements showed a significant correlation (p < 0.05) in 19 patients (66%). Correlation was poor (p > 0.05) in 10 patients (34%). The mean difference between PCWP and CVP was 3.5 +/- 2.6 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -1.6 to 8.7) in untreated patients. The mean difference between PCWP and CVP for 256 pairs of data derived posttreatment was 4.9 +/- 3.8 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -2.7 to 12. 5). CONCLUSION: Invasive measurements of CVP and PCWP were found to agree poorly. Until a reliable noninvasive method is available to measure left ventricular preload, PCWP is the measurement of choice when invasive hemodynamic monitoring is necessary in patients with severe preeclampsia.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To establish if agreement exists between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) measurements in severe hypertension in pregnancy as analyzed by tests of bias, precision, and 95% limits of agreement. METHODS: In a prospective study, CVP and PCWP data in 30 patients were collected by means of a pulmonary artery catheter from initiation of therapy until delivery. Patients with a diastolic blood pressure of more than 110 mm Hg were included. Correlation and agreement between CVP and PCWP before and after treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: The correlation coefficient (r) for CVP-PCWP data in 30 untreated patients was r = 0.64 (p = 0.0002) and for 256 pairs of posttreatment data, it was r = 0.53 (p < 0.0001). Linear regression and correlation for each individual patient in 29 patients with more than 3 measurements showed a significant correlation (p < 0.05) in 19 patients (66%). Correlation was poor (p > 0.05) in 10 patients (34%). The mean difference between PCWP and CVP was 3.5 +/- 2.6 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -1.6 to 8.7) in untreated patients. The mean difference between PCWP and CVP for 256 pairs of data derived posttreatment was 4.9 +/- 3.8 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -2.7 to 12. 5). CONCLUSION: Invasive measurements of CVP and PCWP were found to agree poorly. Until a reliable noninvasive method is available to measure left ventricular preload, PCWP is the measurement of choice when invasive hemodynamic monitoring is necessary in patients with severe preeclampsia.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 53 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To establish if agreement exists between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) measurements in severe hypertension in pregnancy as analyzed by tests of bias, precision, and 95% limits of agreement. METHODS: In a prospective study, CVP and PCWP data in 30 patients were collected by means of a pulmonary artery catheter from initiation of therapy until delivery. Patients with a diastolic blood pressure of more than 110 mm Hg were included. Correlation and agreement between CVP and PCWP before and after treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: The correlation coefficient (r) for CVP-PCWP data in 30 untreated patients was r = 0.64 (p = 0.0002) and for 256 pairs of posttreatment data, it was r = 0.53 (p < 0.0001). Linear regression and correlation for each individual patient in 29 patients with more than 3 measurements showed a significant correlation (p < 0.05) in 19 patients (66%). Correlation was poor (p > 0.05) in 10 patients (34%). The mean difference between PCWP and CVP was 3.5 +/- 2.6 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -1.6 to 8.7) in untreated patients. The mean difference between PCWP and CVP for 256 pairs of data derived posttreatment was 4.9 +/- 3.8 mm Hg (limits of agreement: -2.7 to 12. 5). CONCLUSION: Invasive measurements of CVP and PCWP were found to agree poorly. Until a reliable noninvasive method is available to measure left ventricular preload, PCWP is the measurement of choice when invasive hemodynamic monitoring is necessary in patients with severe preeclampsia.

Key concepts: Medicine, Pulmonary wedge pressure, Central venous pressure, Pulmonary artery catheter, Cardiology, Internal medicine, Preload, Pulmonary artery

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
LACK OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL VENOUS PRESSURE AND PULMONARY CAPILLARY WEDGE PRESSURE IN PREECLAMPSIA — Research Paper | ScholarLens