SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Med.
Sec. Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesiology
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1578348
This article is part of the Research TopicProtective HemodynamicsView all 4 articles
The Impact of PICCO Monitoring on Traumatic Shock: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Provisionally accepted
- 1Department of Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Suqian Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Suqian, Jiangsu Province, China
- 2Department of Critical Care Medicine, Suqian Hospital of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital Group, Suqian, China
- 3Clinical Medicine Department of Yangzhou University Medical College, Yangzhou, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Purpose: This study aims to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of Pulse Indicator Continuous Cardiac Output (PICCO) compared with conventional central venous pressure (CVP) monitoring in the treatment of traumatic shock. Methods: A systematic literature retrieval was conducted in databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from database inception to October 22, 2024. Keywords such as “PICCO,” “traumatic shock,” and “hemorrhagic shock” were used. Retrieved studies were screened according to pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and the Cochrane “risk of bias” tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes, including mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of ICU stay, were extracted and meta-analyzed. Results: A total of 15 studies comprising 1,188 patients were included, with 597 monitored by PICCO and 591 by routine CVP. The risk of bias was assessed as low for all studies. PICCO-monitored patients showed a significantly shorter duration of mechanical ventilation compared to the control group (SMD in random effects model: -1.66; 95% CI: [-2.38, -0.94]). However, no significant differences were found in mortality or length of ICU stay. Conclusion: PICCO monitoring can improve the prognosis of traumatic shock patients by shortening the duration of mechanical ventilation, but it does not significantly affect mortality or length of ICU stay. Given the limitations of the included studies, further exploration is warranted to verify these conclusions.
Keywords: Pulse indicator continuous cardiac output, Traumatic shock, hemorrhagic shock, Meta-analysis, Central Venous Pressure
Received: 17 Feb 2025; Accepted: 21 Oct 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Lin, Lin, Xu, Chen and Ni. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Xun Ni, n18751086362@163.com
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.