Karl-Heinz Smolle1, Martin Schmid, Helga Prettenthaler, Christian Weger. 1. From the *Department of Internal Medicine and Intensive Care, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria; †Institute for Medical Engineering, University of Technology Graz, Graz, Austria; and ‡Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In cases of intensive care unit (ICU) patients without an arterial line, noninvasive continuous blood pressure monitoring could be very beneficial. The CNAP® monitor (CNSystems Medizintechnik AG) provides noninvasive, beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) estimates using the volume clamp method to measure finger arterial pressure calibrated to brachial pressure values. The aim of this study was to compare noninvasive BP estimates of the CNAP monitor with invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements obtained via a radial arterial catheter in unselected medical ICU patients under routine clinical conditions. METHODS: In 40 adult patients, IBP and noninvasive CNAP blood pressure (CBP) were measured simultaneously for 30 minutes. Bland-Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements revealed accuracy and precision of CBP toward IBP. Percentage errors were calculated using the summary measures method and tested for interchangeability. Trending analysis was assessed using 4-quadrant plots and polar plots, whereby each reported statistical calculation used the sample size of n = 40 patients. RESULTS: A total of 7200 measurement pairs of CBP and IBP were analyzed. For mean arterial pressure, accuracy ± precision resulted in 4.6 ± 6.7 mm Hg (limits of agreement -8.7 to 17.8 mm Hg) with a percentage error of 6.77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.57%-6.97%). Trending analysis of 3-minute intervals showed a concordance rate of 94.6% (95% CI, 94.0%-95.2%; exclusion zone 10%) and a polar concordance rate of 99.50% (95% CI, 99.48%-99.52%) for changes lying within 10% limits. CONCLUSIONS: The CNAP device provided feasible estimates of BP in unselected medical ICU patients under routine clinical conditions. Mean arterial pressure met interchangeability criteria for accuracy toward radial arterial pressure, as well as for percentage error, and showed good trending capabilities according to the Critchley predefined criteria.
BACKGROUND: In cases of intensive care unit (ICU) patients without an arterial line, noninvasive continuous blood pressure monitoring could be very beneficial. The CNAP® monitor (CNSystems Medizintechnik AG) provides noninvasive, beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) estimates using the volume clamp method to measure finger arterial pressure calibrated to brachial pressure values. The aim of this study was to compare noninvasive BP estimates of the CNAP monitor with invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements obtained via a radial arterial catheter in unselected medical ICU patients under routine clinical conditions. METHODS: In 40 adult patients, IBP and noninvasive CNAP blood pressure (CBP) were measured simultaneously for 30 minutes. Bland-Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements revealed accuracy and precision of CBP toward IBP. Percentage errors were calculated using the summary measures method and tested for interchangeability. Trending analysis was assessed using 4-quadrant plots and polar plots, whereby each reported statistical calculation used the sample size of n = 40 patients. RESULTS: A total of 7200 measurement pairs of CBP and IBP were analyzed. For mean arterial pressure, accuracy ± precision resulted in 4.6 ± 6.7 mm Hg (limits of agreement -8.7 to 17.8 mm Hg) with a percentage error of 6.77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.57%-6.97%). Trending analysis of 3-minute intervals showed a concordance rate of 94.6% (95% CI, 94.0%-95.2%; exclusion zone 10%) and a polar concordance rate of 99.50% (95% CI, 99.48%-99.52%) for changes lying within 10% limits. CONCLUSIONS: The CNAP device provided feasible estimates of BP in unselected medical ICU patients under routine clinical conditions. Mean arterial pressure met interchangeability criteria for accuracy toward radial arterial pressure, as well as for percentage error, and showed good trending capabilities according to the Critchley predefined criteria.
Authors: M Habicher; T Zajonz; M Heringlake; A Böning; S Treskatsch; U Schirmer; A Markewitz; M Sander Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Bernd Saugel; Christina Vokuhl; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Thomas Rösch; Martin Petzoldt; Benjamin Löser Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2020-06-05 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: Julia Y Wagner; Annmarie Körner; Leonie Schulte-Uentrop; Mathias Kubik; Hermann Reichenspurner; Stefan Kluge; Daniel A Reuter; Bernd Saugel Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Younghoon Kwon; Patrick L Stafford; Martin C Baruch; Sung-Hoon Kim; Yeilim Cho; Sula Mazimba; Lawrence W Gimple Journal: Blood Press Monit Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 1.444
Authors: Amrita Pal; Fernando Martinez; Andrea P Aguila; Margaret A Akey; Roopsha Chatterjee; Merry Grace E Conserman; Ravi S Aysola; Luke A Henderson; Paul M Macey Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062