000			03032cam a2200337 a 4500
003			EG-GiCUC
008			220226s2021 ua dh f m 000 0 eng d
040			_aEG-GiCUC _beng _cEG-GiCUC
041	0		_aeng
049			_aDeposite
097			_aPh.D
099			_aCai01.11.01.Ph.D.2021.Ah.H
100	0		_aAhmed Salah Abdelazeem Elsayed
245	1	0	_aHemodynamic monitoring and correlation between electrical cardiometry and esophageal doppler in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery / _cAhmed Salah Abdelazeem Elsayed ; Suervised Tarek Abdelhalium Kaddah , Abla Elhadedy , Shady Rady Abdallah
246	1	5	_aمراقبة الدورة الدموية و الارتباط بين جهاز القياس الكهربائى لقوة القلب و دوبلر المرئ فى المرضى الذين يخضعون لجراحات البطن الكبرى
260			_aCairo : _bAhmed Salah Abdelazeem Elsayed , _c2021
300			_a91 P. : _bcharts , facsimiles ; _c25cm
502			_aThesis (Ph.D.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Medicine - Department of Anesthesia
520			_aObjectives: The aim of this study is to correlate hemodynamic monitoring between noninvasive Electrical Cardiometry (EC) and minimally invasive Esophageal Doppler(ED) in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Patients and Methods: The research was conducted on thirty five adult patients, ASA II or III, undergoing major abdominal surgery. Patients were allocated into one group, with Esophageal Doppler and Electrical Cardiometry attached on the same patient. parameters measured were hemodynamic parameters (blood pressure, heart rate, cardiac output, cardiac index.Stroke volume, stroke volume index, systemic vascular resistance and oxygen delivery index). Results: Comparison of cardiac output (CO) with ICON and ED.The ICON mean value range from 5.6 to 6.2 l/min and ED mean value range from 5.7 to 7.6 l/min with non-significant difference between the two methods in all times.The precision for the ICON was measured to be ranged from 15.19 to 17.99% and the precision for ED was ranged from 13.39 to 17.08%. A 15% change of ED values were examined and the sensitivity and specificity of these values to detect an acute change in ICON was calculated and showed that it was highly sensitive 72.6% but low specific 30.9% for acute changes in CO with AUC 0.505. Conclusion: The agreement between CO measured by EC and ED is acceptable. Both were able to monitor trend changes and guide fluid administration in the operation theatre. The EC is as accurate as ED in measuring hemodynamics during major abdominal surgery
530			_aIssued also as CD
650		0	_aHemodynamic monitoring
653			_aAbdominal surgery
653			_aElectrical cardiometry
653			_aEsophageal doppler
700	0		_aAbla Elhadedy , _eSupervisor
700	0		_aShady Rady Abdallah , _eSupervisor
700	0		_aTarek Abdelhalium Kaddah , _eSupervisor
905			_aNazla _eRevisor
905			_aShimaa _eCataloger
942			_2ddc _cTH
999			_c84334 _d84334