Search

Background/aim: The aim of the current study was to assess the accuracy of cardiac output (CO) measurements obtained by the Nexfin finger cuff method as compared with the FloTrac/Vigileo and echocardiography methods in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients. Materials and methods: First-time elective CABG patients were prospectively enrolled in this study and divided into three groups according to CO measurement method. CO measurements were performed simultaneously by three different contributors and were collected by the fourth one 24 h postoperative in the intensive care unit (ICU). Data were statistically analyzed. Results: Seventeen female and 13 male patients between 42 and 78 years of age (with a mean of 56 ± 4) were the subjects of this study. The mean CO measurements were 5.9 ± 1.4 L/min, 5.8 ± 1.1 L/min, and 6.0 ± 1.1 L/min for the Nexfin, FloTrac/Vigileo, and echocardiography methods, respectively (P > 0.05). The correlation values between Nexfin and FloTrac/Vigileo, Nexfin and echocardiography, and FloTrac/Vigileo and echocardiography were r = 0.445, r = 0.377, and r = 0.384, respectively (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Nexfin yielded results comparable to those obtained with FloTrac/Vigileo and echocardiography for the postoperative CO assessment of CABG patients. Nexfin may be used in uncomplicated, hemodynamically stable patients in ICU as a reliable and totally noninvasive method of CO measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The study was done to determine the effect of different types of drain to postoperative effusion and pain on patients who enderwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Material and Methods: 50 patients data were evaluated prospectively. Standart drain was placed into 7-8th intercostal area (Group 1). L drain was placed into pleural area (Group 2). Demographic data, drainage amounts were written from hospital documents. Postoperative phericardial and pleural effusion was determined by echocardiography and chest x-ray. Verbal Rating Scale was used to dedicate pain score. Data were analyzed by T test. Results: Groups demographic data were similar. Drainage was 652.0+328.3 ml (Group 1), 620.0 ± 169.5 ml (p=0.04) in Group 2. Pain score before taking of drain was 2.0±2.6 (Group 1), 1,0±1.6 (p=0.0l) in Group 2, after taking of drain was 4.7+3.0 (Group 1), 2.1±2.0 (p=0.05) in Group 2. Fifteen day mean phericardial effusion was 0.2±0.4 cm (Group 1), 0.1±0.3 (p=0.05) in Group 2. There was no difference between other parameters. Conclusion: Using both types of drain seems to be safe but L drain is more comfortable because of less pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]