Literature DB >> 1395767

Does radial artery pressure accurately reflect aortic pressure?

A L Pauca1, S L Wallenhaupt, N D Kon, W Y Tucker.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether the systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures measured in the radial artery accurately reflect corresponding pressures in the ascending aorta in narcotic-anesthetized patients with known obstructive coronary artery disease, before being subjected to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).
DESIGN: This was a prospective study.
SETTING: The cardiac operating room of a large, tertiary-care university medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-one patients (45 men and six women; age range, 48 to 77 years) with documented atherosclerotic coronary artery disease were studied. All patients underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting after the study.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were premedicated with lorazepam and morphine 60 min before administration of Fentanyl-pancuronium anesthesia. The radial artery was cannulated before induction of anesthesia and the aorta approximately 45 min later. Comparisons of radial and aortic pressures were then performed. MEASUREMENTS AND
RESULTS: Radial and aortic pressures were recorded through standard, fluid-filled, high-pressure, 91-cm (36-in) long tubing and disposable transducers, meticulously cleared of air bubbles. Additional measurements included cardiac output, central venous pressure, core temperature, blood gas levels, and hematocrit reading. Radial-aortic pressure differences were as follows: systolic arterial pressure (SAP), 12 +/- 1 mm Hg; mean arterial pressure (MAP), -0.8 +/- 0.3 mm Hg; and diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), -1.0 +/- 0.3 mm Hg. All were significant (p < 0.001), but the SAP difference was more than ten times that of either the MAP or the DAP values. The coefficients of determination (r2) indicated that the radial-aortic dependence was 0.44 for the SAP, 0.90 for the DAP, and 0.98 for the MAP relationship. Plotting the respective differences against the arithmetic mean of simultaneously measured pressures indicated that the radial SAP was 4 to 35 mm Hg higher than the aortic in 42 patients (82 percent) and was 10 to 35 mm Hg higher in 26 patients (51 percent); radial-aortic MAP differences clustered within 3 mm Hg in 47 patients (92 percent); radial DAP was +/- 3 mm Hg different from the aortic in 46 patients (90 percent). The largest MAP difference was -6 mm Hg in one patient. The largest DAP difference was +/- 5 mm Hg in three patients.
CONCLUSIONS: In this group of patients, who were studied before undergoing CPB, the radial SAP gave a poor estimate of that present in the ascending aorta, since in more than 50 percent of the cases, the radial SAP was 10 to 35 mm Hg higher than that in the aorta. The radial MAP and DAP are reliable, since in 90 percent and 92 percent of the patients, respectively, the pressure differences were within +/- 3 mm Hg of those in the aorta.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1395767     DOI: 10.1378/chest.102.4.1193

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  58 in total

1.  The influence of heart rate on augmentation index and central arterial pressure in humans.

Authors:  I B Wilkinson; H MacCallum; L Flint; J R Cockcroft; D E Newby; D J Webb
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2000-05-15       Impact factor: 5.182

Review 2.  Diastolic pressure, systolic pressure, or pulse pressure?

Authors:  C Vlachopoulos; M O'Rourke
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.369

3.  The mean prehospital machine; accurate prehospital non-invasive blood pressure measurement in the critically ill patient.

Authors:  Sandy Muecke; Andrew Bersten; John Plummer
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 4.  Noninvasive studies of central aortic pressure.

Authors:  Michael F O'Rourke; Audrey Adji
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 5.369

Review 5.  Meta-analysis of the comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents on brachial and central systolic blood pressure, and augmentation index.

Authors:  Charlotte H Manisty; Alun D Hughes
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 6.  Continuous and less invasive central hemodynamic monitoring by blood pressure waveform analysis.

Authors:  Ramakrishna Mukkamala; Da Xu
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 4.733

Review 7.  Pulsatile and Steady-State Pressure Trends in Children: Is the Future Now?: Comment on the Paper by Zachariah and Kovacikova [Pulse 2014;2:57-62].

Authors:  Michael F O'Rourke
Journal:  Pulse (Basel)       Date:  2015-02-03

Review 8.  Arterial Catheterization and Infection: Toll-like Receptors in Defense against Microorganisms and Therapeutic Implications.

Authors:  Zakary J Hambsch; Mitchell J Kerfeld; Daniel R Kirkpatrick; Dan M McEntire; Mark D Reisbig; Charles F Youngblood; Devendra K Agrawal
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 4.689

9.  Relationship between blood pressure obtained from the upper arm with a cuff-type sphygmomanometer and central blood pressure measured with a catheter-tipped micromanometer.

Authors:  Nobuyuki Ohte; Tomoaki Saeki; Hiromichi Miyabe; Seichiro Sakata; Seiji Mukai; Junichiro Hayano; Kiyomi Niki; Motoaki Sugawara; Genjiro Kimura
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 2.037

10.  Contribution of arterial stiffness and stroke volume to peripheral pulse pressure in ICU patients: an arterial tonometry study.

Authors:  Bouchra Lamia; Jean-Louis Teboul; Xavier Monnet; David Osman; Julien Maizel; Christian Richard; Denis Chemla
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.