This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In his Editorial on pulmonary artery catheters (PACs), Dr Hall¹ stated that "there are no studies in the medical literature that demonstrate a benefit for PAC use in . . . the perioperative patient." Hall may be unaware of the difficulties posed by perioperative care for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm in the 1960s and 1970s before the advent of the PAC, echocardiography, and most of the advanced cardiac pharmacotherapy we now use. At that time, the volume status of a patient with abdominal aortic aneurysm was very difficult to discern, especially when the patient was hypothermic at the time that volume shifts were occurring. I am just old enough to have seen patients develop severe renal failure because of an erroneous impression that patients were "wet" when they were really "dry," and central venous pressure measurements were usually useless in this circumstance. I have seen the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Use of the Pulmonary Artery Catheter in Critically Ill Patients: Was Invention the Mother of Necessity?
Jesse B. Hall
JAMA. 2000;283(19):2577-2578.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT