M Biais1, L Vidil, S Roullet, F Masson, A Quinart, P Revel, F Sztark. 1. Service d'anesthésie réanimation 1, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux cedex, France. matthieu.biais@chu-bordeaux.fr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Standard non-invasive blood pressure (BP) monitoring is an intermittent, discontinuous procedure. Beat-to-beat BP monitoring requires invasive measurement via an arterial catheter and may be associated with serious complications. The Infinity CNAP SmartPod (Dräger Medical AG & Co. KG, Lübeck, Germany) has recently been proposed for non-invasive continuous beat-to-beat BP measurements. The present study was designed to compare BP obtained with the CNAP and with an invasive method in the operating room. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients undergoing major vascular surgery were included. Systolic, mean and diastolic BP were monitored invasively (SAP, MAP and DAP respectively) and not invasively using the CNAP (CNAP-S, CNAP-M and CNAP-D respectively). Measurements were performed intraoperatively every minute during 1 hour. RESULTS: One thousand and five hundred pairs of simultaneous CNAP and invasive BP measurements were obtained and 148 were eliminated. The range of BP measurements was 63-205 mmHg for SAP and 57-187 mmHg for CNAP-S, 38-143 mmHg for MAP and 43-142 mmHg for CNAP-M, 29-126 mmHg for DAP and 33-121 mmHg for CNAP-D. Bias and 95% limit of agreement between CNAP and invasive BP measurements were respectively 7.2 and -17.7 to 32.2 mmHg for SAP, -1.8 and -22.0 to 18.3 mmHg for MAP, and -7.5 and -27.3 to 12.4 mmHg for DAP. The percentage of CNAP measurements with a bias <10% with the arterial line was 69%, 86% and 91% for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite low accuracy for SAP and DAP measurements, CNAP system seems more accurate for MAP measurement in patients undergoing vascular surgery. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: Standard non-invasive blood pressure (BP) monitoring is an intermittent, discontinuous procedure. Beat-to-beat BP monitoring requires invasive measurement via an arterial catheter and may be associated with serious complications. The Infinity CNAP SmartPod (Dräger Medical AG & Co. KG, Lübeck, Germany) has recently been proposed for non-invasive continuous beat-to-beat BP measurements. The present study was designed to compare BP obtained with the CNAP and with an invasive method in the operating room. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients undergoing major vascular surgery were included. Systolic, mean and diastolic BP were monitored invasively (SAP, MAP and DAP respectively) and not invasively using the CNAP (CNAP-S, CNAP-M and CNAP-D respectively). Measurements were performed intraoperatively every minute during 1 hour. RESULTS: One thousand and five hundred pairs of simultaneous CNAP and invasive BP measurements were obtained and 148 were eliminated. The range of BP measurements was 63-205 mmHg for SAP and 57-187 mmHg for CNAP-S, 38-143 mmHg for MAP and 43-142 mmHg for CNAP-M, 29-126 mmHg for DAP and 33-121 mmHg for CNAP-D. Bias and 95% limit of agreement between CNAP and invasive BP measurements were respectively 7.2 and -17.7 to 32.2 mmHg for SAP, -1.8 and -22.0 to 18.3 mmHg for MAP, and -7.5 and -27.3 to 12.4 mmHg for DAP. The percentage of CNAP measurements with a bias <10% with the arterial line was 69%, 86% and 91% for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite low accuracy for SAP and DAP measurements, CNAP system seems more accurate for MAP measurement in patients undergoing vascular surgery. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
Authors: Julia Y Wagner; Ileana Negulescu; Miriam Schöfthaler; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Agnes S Meidert; Wolfgang Huber; Roland M Schmid; Bernd Saugel Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2015-03-01 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Jan Benes; Alena Simanova; Tereza Tovarnicka; Silvie Sevcikova; Jakub Kletecka; Jan Zatloukal; Richard Pradl; Ivan Chytra; Eduard Kasal Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Issa Pour-Ghaz; Theodore Manolukas; Nathalie Foray; Joel Raja; Aranyak Rawal; Uzoma N Ibebuogu; Rami N Khouzam Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2019-09
Authors: Joseph D Tobias; Chris McKee; Dan Herz; Steve Teich; Paul Sohner; Julie Rice; N'Diris Barry; Marc Michalsky Journal: J Anesth Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Jan Benes; Lenka Haidingerova; Jiri Pouska; Jan Stepanik; Alena Stenglova; Jan Zatloukal; Richard Pradl; Ivan Chytra; Eduard Kasal Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 2.217
Authors: Julia Y Wagner; Julia S Prantner; Agnes S Meidert; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Roland M Schmid; Bernd Saugel Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Felix Balzer; Marit Habicher; Michael Sander; Julian Sterr; Stephanie Scholz; Aarne Feldheiser; Michael Müller; Carsten Perka; Sascha Treskatsch Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 1.671