par Vincent, Jean Louis 
;Rhodes, Andrew;Perel, Azriel;Martin, Greg;Rocca, Giorgio Della;Vallet, Benoit;Pinsky, Michaël ;Hofer, Christoph;Teboul, Jean Louis;de Boode, Willem-Pieter;Scolletta, Sabino;Vieillard-Baron, Antoine;De Backer, Daniel ;Walley, Keith R;Maggiorini, Marco;Singer, Mervyn
Référence Critical care, 15, 4, page (229)
Publication Publié, 2011
;Rhodes, Andrew;Perel, Azriel;Martin, Greg;Rocca, Giorgio Della;Vallet, Benoit;Pinsky, Michaël ;Hofer, Christoph;Teboul, Jean Louis;de Boode, Willem-Pieter;Scolletta, Sabino;Vieillard-Baron, Antoine;De Backer, Daniel ;Walley, Keith R;Maggiorini, Marco;Singer, MervynRéférence Critical care, 15, 4, page (229)
Publication Publié, 2011
Article révisé par les pairs
| Résumé : | Hemodynamic monitoring plays a fundamental role in the management of acutely ill patients. With increased concerns about the use of invasive techniques, notably the pulmonary artery catheter, to measure cardiac output, recent years have seen an influx of new, less-invasive means of measuring hemodynamic variables, leaving the clinician somewhat bewildered as to which technique, if any, is best and which he/she should use. In this consensus paper, we try to provide some clarification, offering an objective review of the available monitoring systems, including their specific advantages and limitations, and highlighting some key principles underlying hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients. |
