Abstract

PAC-guided therapy did not improve survival or organ function but was associated with more complications than CVC-guided therapy. These results, when considered with those of previous studies, suggest that the PAC should not be routinely used for the management of acute lung injury. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00281268.).

Keywords

MedicinePulmonary artery catheterAnesthesiaCentral venous catheterIntensive care unitConfidence intervalDialysis catheterDialysisHemodynamicsRandomized controlled trialShock (circulatory)Acute kidney injuryRenal replacement therapyCatheterPulmonary arteryCrossover studyCardiologySurgeryIntensive care medicineCardiac outputInternal medicine

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2006
Type
article
Volume
354
Issue
21
Pages
2213-2224
Citations
974
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

974
OpenAlex

Cite This

Arthur P. Wheeler, Gordon R. Bernard, Bruce Thompson et al. (2006). Pulmonary-Artery versus Central Venous Catheter to Guide Treatment of Acute Lung Injury. New England Journal of Medicine , 354 (21) , 2213-2224. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa061895

Identifiers

DOI
10.1056/nejmoa061895