Introduction
============

Estimation of extravascular lung water (EVLW) by the single indicator dilution technique (SDT) implemented in the PICCO monitoring system relies on a relationship between intrathoracic blood volume (ITBV) and global end diastolic volume (GEDV), which has been derived from a large population of mixed critically ill patients using the double indicator dilution technique (thermal and indocyanine green dyes, DDT): ITBV~sdt~ = 1.25 × GEDV \[[@B1]\]. Since the difference between ITBV and GEDV corresponds to pulmonary blood volume (PBV), we can write: PBV~sdt~ = 0.25 × GEDV. Any factor influencing this relationship can affect SDT accuracy. The aims of our study were: 1) to compare SDT versus DDT for EVLW measurements in ARDS patients; and 2) to explore factors influencing the PBV and GEDV relationship, and affecting SDT accuracy.

Methods
=======

We studied 21 ARDS patients (PaO~2~/FiO~2~ = 165 ± 65), monitored with a Swan--Ganz catheter, and a 4 F thermistore-tipped, fiberoptic catheter inserted through a femoral artery, both connected to a COLD monitoring system. SDT measurements were obtained by mean transit time and down slope time of thermal indicator using standard formula. Statistical analysis was performed by single and multiple linear regression analysis; accuracy was assessed according to Bland and Altman method.

Results
=======

Agreement between EVLW~ddt~ and EVLW~sdt~ showed a bias of 15.3 ± 135.8, and a 95% confidence interval of -256 and 287; the correlation coefficient was *r* = 0.92 (*P* \< 0.001). Correlations of GEDV and PBV~sdt~ with PBV~ddt~, although significant, were poor (*r* = 0.394, *P* \< 0.01). EVLW~ddt~ indexed to body weight (EVLWi) and cardiac index (CI) explained 64% of PBV indexed to body surface area (PBVi) variance (*P* \< 0.001). EVLWi, CI, central venous pressure (CVP), and PaCO~2~ explained 82% of PBVi to GEDVi ratio variance (*P* \< 0.001). EVLW~ddt~ to EVLW~sdt~ differences were highly correlated with PBV~ddt~ (*r* = 0.88, *P* \< 0.001). EVLWi, CI and PaCO~2~ explained 65% of the differences between EVLW~ddt~ and EVLW~sdt~ variance (EVLW~ddt~ - EVLW~sdt~ = -263 + 18.64 × EVLWi - 50.9 × CI + 5.3 × PaCO~2~, *r*^2^ = 0.65, *P* \< 0.001).

Conclusions
===========

The SDT gives acceptable estimates of EVLW in ARDS patients. EVLWi, CI and PaCO~2~ may influence the relationship between PBV and GEDV, and may affect accuracy of EVLW measured by SDT.
