This topic is vaguely touched upon in Question 27.1 from the first paper of 2008, and the comparison of the two measurement techniques was explored in Question 5 from the second paper of 2006. The usual tricks seems to be asking the candidate to come up with an x number of causes of ridiculously high SvO2. Central venous saturation measurements are discussed in greater detail elsewhere, as is the calculation of the oxygen extraction ratio.
Here is a nice tabulated answer.
SvO2: mixed venous saturation |
ScvO2: central venous saturation |
|
Measurement |
Pulmonary artery |
Superior vena cava |
Invasiveness |
Invasive |
Less invasive than SvO2 |
Blood content |
Mixed right atrial blood with blood from the coronary sinus, |
Mixed blood from the head and |
Higher measurements |
Normal conditions: Oh's Manual specifies that under normal physiological conditions central venous saturation (ScvO2) is 2-3% lower than mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO2). |
Pathological states: ScvO2 can be abnormally elevated under the following conditions:
|
Lower measurements |
Pathological states: SvO2 can be abnormally depressed under the following circumstances:
|
Normal conditions: ScvO2 is usually 2-3% lower than SvO2. |
Other data generated from |
The PA catheter can measure the following variables directly:
On top of that, thermodilution measurements can be performed, with numeorus dreived variables including cardiac output. |
CVP. Only CVP. |
Evidence from clinical trials |
Study by Gattinoni – only |
Study by Rivers- early goal |
Other benefits |
In general no benefit from |
CVCs are required for drug administration |
Complications: |
More risk from PACs |
Less invasive and therefore |
In brief summary, the further up you move away from the pulmonary artery, the greater your SvO2becomes; whereas if you go further down, the very hypoxic splanchnic venous blood will decrease the SvO2.
Chawla, Lakhmir S., et al. "Lack of equivalence between central and mixed venous oxygen saturation." CHEST Journal 126.6 (2004): 1891-1896.