TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring during carotid endarterectomy
AU - Heusdens, J. F.
AU - Lof, S.
AU - Pennekamp, C. W. A.
AU - Specken-Welleweerd, J. C.
AU - de Borst, G. J.
AU - van Klei, W. A.
AU - van Wolfswinkel, L.
AU - Immink, R. V.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Background: Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy require strict arterial blood pressure (BP) control to maintain adequate cerebral perfusion. In this study we tested whether non-invasive beat-to-beat Nexfin finger BP (BPfin) can replace invasive beat-to-beat radial artery BP (BPrad) in this setting. Methods: In 25 consecutive patients (median age 71 yr) scheduled for carotid endarterectomy and receiving general anaesthesia, BPfin and BPrad were monitored simultaneously and ipsilaterally during the 30-min period surrounding carotid artery cross-clamping. Validation was guided by the standard set by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), which considers a BP monitor adequate when bias (precision) is <5 (8) mm Hg, respectively. Results: BPfin, us BPrad bias (precision) was -3.3 (10.8), 6.1 (5.7) and 3.5 (5.2) mm Hg for systolic, diastolic, and mean BP, respectively. One subject was excluded due to a poor quality BP curve. In another subject, mean BPfin overestimated mean BPrad by 13.5 mm Hg. Conclusion: Mean BPfin could be considered as an alternative for mean BPrad during a carotid endarterectomy, based on the AAMI criteria. In 23 of 24 patients, the use of mean BPfin would not lead to decisions to adjust mean BPrad values outside the predefined BP threshold
AB - Background: Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy require strict arterial blood pressure (BP) control to maintain adequate cerebral perfusion. In this study we tested whether non-invasive beat-to-beat Nexfin finger BP (BPfin) can replace invasive beat-to-beat radial artery BP (BPrad) in this setting. Methods: In 25 consecutive patients (median age 71 yr) scheduled for carotid endarterectomy and receiving general anaesthesia, BPfin and BPrad were monitored simultaneously and ipsilaterally during the 30-min period surrounding carotid artery cross-clamping. Validation was guided by the standard set by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), which considers a BP monitor adequate when bias (precision) is <5 (8) mm Hg, respectively. Results: BPfin, us BPrad bias (precision) was -3.3 (10.8), 6.1 (5.7) and 3.5 (5.2) mm Hg for systolic, diastolic, and mean BP, respectively. One subject was excluded due to a poor quality BP curve. In another subject, mean BPfin overestimated mean BPrad by 13.5 mm Hg. Conclusion: Mean BPfin could be considered as an alternative for mean BPrad during a carotid endarterectomy, based on the AAMI criteria. In 23 of 24 patients, the use of mean BPfin would not lead to decisions to adjust mean BPrad values outside the predefined BP threshold
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew268
DO - https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew268
M3 - Article
C2 - 27543526
SN - 0007-0912
VL - 117
SP - 316
EP - 323
JO - British Journal of Anaesthesia
JF - British Journal of Anaesthesia
IS - 3
ER -