Cardiothoracic & vascular anesthesia
Fourth Generation FloTrac Software Pulse Contour Analysis for Measuring and Trending Cardiac Output: A Method Comparison Study
Authors' conclusion
The FloTrac method did not meet the criteria for interchangeability with the thermodilution method for measuring cardiac output in patients after cardiac surgery. Percentage errors were unacceptable for all time points.
Study context
- Population
- Cardiac surgery patients, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, September 2023 to September 2024
- Participants
- 41 patients
- Exposure
- FloTrac method vs Thermodilution method
- Outcome
- Accuracy, precision and trending of CO (bias, limits of agreement, percentage error, concordance rate) before and after two preload-increasing interventions (modified Trendelenburg maneuver, fluid bolus); interchangeability if bias within ±0.5 L/min, PE < 30%, concordance ≥ 90%
Methodological detailsprospective, single-centre
- Prospective
- Single-centre
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Agreement and trending of FloTrac vs thermodilution CO
- Bias range depending on intervention (L/min)
- −0.36 to 0.79
- Percentage error before fluid administration
- 37%
- Percentage error after fluid administration
- 35%
- Percentage error before Trendelenburg maneuver
- 37%
- Percentage error after Trendelenburg maneuver
- 42%
- Concordance rate after fluid administration
- 85%
- Concordance rate after modified Trendelenburg maneuver
- 72%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | FloTrac method |
|---|---|
| Identification of fluid responders (thermodilution as reference) | |
| Sensitivity | 23% |
| Specificity | 84% |
Original publication
Fourth Generation FloTrac Software Pulse Contour Analysis for Measuring and Trending Cardiac Output: A Method Comparison Study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 25 June 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →