Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

ICU TopicsMonitoring / haemodynamics

ICU · Monitoring / haemodynamics

Advanced Haemodynamic Monitoring — PA Catheter, PiCCO & Pulse Contour

Also known as Advanced haemodynamic monitoring · Pulmonary artery catheter · PAC · Swan-Ganz · PiCCO · Transpulmonary thermodilution · Pulse contour analysis · FloTrac · Vigileo · LiDCO · Esophageal Doppler · Extravascular lung water · EVLW · GEDI · ITBI · Mixed venous oxygen saturation · SvO2 · LVOT VTI

Advanced haemodynamic monitoring measures the cardiac output and related variables beyond the basic arterial and CVP lines. The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC, Swan-Ganz) is the gold standard — it directly measures the PAWP (left atrial pressure), the SvO2 (oxygen balance), and the CO by thermodilution, but its routine use has declined after the FACTT trial (no benefit over central-line-guided therapy); it is now reserved for complex shock, pulmonary hypertension, and RV failure. The PiCCO (transpulmonary thermodilution) provides the CO, the GEDV (preload), the EVLW (lung water), and a calibrated continuous pulse-contour CO and SVV. Uncalibrated pulse contour devices (FloTrac/Vigileo) use an arterial line alone and are less accurate; LiDCO (lithium dilution) is a calibrated alternative needing only a radial line; esophageal Doppler gives continuous CO from the descending aorta. Echocardiography (LVOT VTI) is the leading non-invasive alternative. The choice depends on the clinical question: filling pressure (PAWP), volume (GEDV), responsiveness (SVV/PPV), or oxygen balance (SvO2).

high21 referencesUpdated 26 July 202623 min readVerification in progress

Practise this topic

  • 8 MCQs

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic8 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

CICMFFICMEDIC

Red flags

  • PAC has no proven mortality benefit (PAC-Man, ESCAPE, FACTT) — use selectively for complex shock, pulmonary HTN, RV failure, MCS titration, never routinely
  • Pulmonary artery rupture is rare but fatal — presents as catastrophic haemoptysis; risk factors anticoagulation, age, female, pulmonary HTN, distal wedge
  • PAC + pre-existing LBBB risks complete heart block (transient RBBB during RV transit) — have pacing available
  • SVV/PPV are INVALID in atrial fibrillation, spontaneous breathing, low tidal volume ventilation, right heart failure, and open chest
  • Uncalibrated pulse contour (FloTrac/Vigileo) loses accuracy when vascular tone changes (vasopressors, sepsis) — use for trends, recalibrate after major changes
  • EVLW (extravascular lung water) predicts mortality and guides fluid strategy — a low or falling EVLW is the target in ARDS/septic shock
  • CVP is a POOR predictor of fluid responsiveness (AUC ~0.56, Marik 2013) — do NOT use alone to guide fluid therapy
On this page
Study tools

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic8 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

CICMFFICMEDIC

Red flags

  • PAC has no proven mortality benefit (PAC-Man, ESCAPE, FACTT) — use selectively for complex shock, pulmonary HTN, RV failure, MCS titration, never routinely
  • Pulmonary artery rupture is rare but fatal — presents as catastrophic haemoptysis; risk factors anticoagulation, age, female, pulmonary HTN, distal wedge
  • PAC + pre-existing LBBB risks complete heart block (transient RBBB during RV transit) — have pacing available
  • SVV/PPV are INVALID in atrial fibrillation, spontaneous breathing, low tidal volume ventilation, right heart failure, and open chest
  • Uncalibrated pulse contour (FloTrac/Vigileo) loses accuracy when vascular tone changes (vasopressors, sepsis) — use for trends, recalibrate after major changes
  • EVLW (extravascular lung water) predicts mortality and guides fluid strategy — a low or falling EVLW is the target in ARDS/septic shock
  • CVP is a POOR predictor of fluid responsiveness (AUC ~0.56, Marik 2013) — do NOT use alone to guide fluid therapy
The one-paragraph exam answer

Advanced haemodynamic monitoring measures the cardiac output and its determinants, and the device you choose is dictated entirely by the clinical question — never by reflex. The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) is the gold standard for PA pressure, wedge (LV filling pressure), true mixed SvO2 and thermodilution CO — but Connors (1996), PAC-Man, ESCAPE and FACTT showed no mortality benefit in routine use, so it is now reserved for complex shock, pulmonary hypertension, RV failure and MCS or cardiac surgery. PiCCO (transpulmonary thermodilution) adds the volume-based preload (GEDV), the lung-water marker that predicts mortality (EVLW), the PVPI (hydrostatic versus permeability oedema) and a calibrated continuous pulse-contour CO with SVV. LiDCO gives a calibrated CO from a radial line; FloTrac/Vigileo is uncalibrated and trend-only; esophageal Doppler shines in perioperative goal-directed therapy; and echocardiography is the first look in any unexplained shock.[1]

Meet the patient

A 58-year-old man is in septic shock from a urinary source. He has had 30 mL/kg of crystalloid, noradrenaline is climbing to 0.3 mcg/kg/min, the lactate is 4.2 and the focused echo shows a small, hyperdynamic LV with kissing walls. The registrar reaches for the PA catheter "to optimise resuscitation" — a reflex the evidence does not support: the PAC should not be used in most critically ill patients.[1]

The two questions that settle the next hour are the two that settle every haemodynamic problem: which question am I actually trying to answer — filling pressure, volume, responsiveness, oxygen balance, lung water — and which is the least invasive monitor that answers it. Hold those two and the device menagerie below slots into place.[7][10]

ICU Fellowship (CICM) Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this topic. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the ICU Fellowship (CICM) fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References21ShowHide
  1. [1]De Backer D, Vincent JL. The pulmonary artery catheter: is it still alive? Curr Opin Crit Care, 2018.PMID 29608456
  2. [2]Connors AF Jr, Speroff T, Dawson NV, et al. The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients. SUPPORT Investigators JAMA, 1996.PMID 8782638
  3. [3]Binanay C, Califf RM, Hasselblad V, et al. Evaluation study of congestive heart failure and pulmonary artery catheterization effectiveness: the ESCAPE trial JAMA, 2005.PMID 16204662
  4. [4]Harvey S, Harrison DA, Singer M, et al. Assessment of the clinical effectiveness of pulmonary artery catheters in management of patients in intensive care (PAC-Man): a randomised controlled trial Lancet, 2005.PMID 16084255
  5. [5]Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Thompson BT, et al. Pulmonary-artery versus central venous catheter to guide treatment of acute lung injury N Engl J Med, 2006.PMID 16714768
  6. [6]Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense Crit Care Med, 2013.PMID 23774337
  7. [7]Cecconi M, De Backer D, Antonelli M, et al. Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Intensive Care Med, 2014.PMID 25392034
  8. [8]Sakka SG, Klein M, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A. Prognostic value of extravascular lung water in critically ill patients Chest, 2002.PMID 12475851
  9. [9]Pearse RM, Harrison DA, MacDonald N, et al. Effect of a perioperative, cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm on outcomes following major gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized clinical trial and systematic review JAMA, 2014.PMID 24842135
  10. [10]Pinsky MR, Cecconi M, Chew MS, et al. Effective hemodynamic monitoring Crit Care, 2022.PMID 36171594
  11. [11]Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature Crit Care Med, 2009.PMID 19602972
  12. [12]Monnet X, Marik P, Teboul JL. Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis Intensive Care Med, 2016.PMID 26825952
  13. [13]Monnet X, Teboul JL. Transpulmonary thermodilution: advantages and limits Crit Care, 2017.PMID 28625165
  14. [14]Messina A, Alicino V, Cecconi M. Transpulmonary thermodilution Curr Opin Crit Care, 2023.PMID 37083621
  15. [15]Linton RA, Band DM, Haire KM. A new method of measuring cardiac output in man using lithium dilution Br J Anaesth, 1993.PMID 8123404
  16. [16]Del Rio-Pertuz G, Nugent K, Argueta-Sosa E. Right heart catheterization in clinical practice: a review of basic physiology and important issues relevant to interpretation Am J Cardiovasc Dis, 2023.PMID 37469534
  17. [17]De Backer D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JL. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume Intensive Care Med, 2005.PMID 15754196
  18. [18]Sakka SG, Rühl CC, Pfeiffer UJ, Beale R, McLuckie A, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A. Assessment of cardiac preload and extravascular lung water by single transpulmonary thermodilution Intensive Care Med, 2000.PMID 10784306
  19. [19]Alvarado-Sánchez JI, Caicedo-Ruiz JD, Torres-Martínez MJ, Diaztagle-Fernández JJ. Fluid responsiveness in ARDS: current evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions - a scoping review of the literature BMC Anesthesiol, 2026.PMID 42143226
  20. [20]Kurita T, Morita K, Kato S, et al. Lithium dilution cardiac output measurements using a peripheral injection site comparison with central injection technique and thermodilution J Clin Monit Comput, 1999.PMID 12568133
  21. [21]Belda FJ, Aguilar G, Teboul JL, et al. Complications related to less-invasive haemodynamic monitoring Br J Anaesth, 2011.PMID 21205627

Test yourself

Practise what you just read

  • 8 MCQs
ICU Fellowship (CICM) Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete ICU Fellowship (CICM) library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousSIADH & Diabetes InsipidusEndocrine & metabolic emergenciesNextAdvanced Respiratory Support — NIV, Weaning and TracheostomyAdvanced respiratory support