| Literature DB >> 33527182 |
Hyongmin Oh1, Suk Hyung Choe1, Yoon Jung Kim1, Hyun-Kyu Yoon1, Hyung-Chul Lee1, Hee-Pyoung Park2.
Abstract
The dynamic response (DR) of the arterial pressure monitoring system (APMS) may depend on the intraarterial catheter (IAC) diameter. We hypothesized that adequate DR would be more common when using a smaller IAC. We compared the DR of the AMPS (Auto Transducer™) between three IACs (BD Angiocath Plus™) with different diameters. 353 neurosurgical patients were randomized into three groups undergoing catheterization with a 20-, 22-, or 24-gauge IAC: 20G (n = 119), 22G (n = 117), and 24G (n = 117) groups, respectively. The DR, which depends on the natural frequency and damping coefficient, was divided into four types: adequate (primary outcome measure), underdamped, overdamped, and unacceptable. The frequency of intraoperative IAC malfunction was noted. Adequate DR was observed more frequently in the 22G and 24G groups than the 20G group (13.7% and 15.4% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.011 and 0.004, respectively). The frequency of underdamped DR was higher in the 20G group than the 24G group (86.6% vs. 69.2%, P = 0.001), whereas overdamped DR was more frequent in the 24G group than the 20G and 22G groups (6.0% vs. 0.0% and 0.0%, P = 0.007 and 0.014, respectively). IAC malfunctioned more frequently during surgery in the 24G group than the 20G and 22G groups (15.4% vs. 0.0% and 1.7%, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The frequency of adequate DR was low regardless of the IAC diameter. Nonetheless, in terms of DR and IAC malfunction, a 22-gauge BD Angiocath Plus™ was more suitable for invasive blood pressure monitoring with Auto Transducer™ than a 20- or 24-gauge BD Angiocath Plus™. Registration Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: NCT03642756. Date of Registration: July 27, 2018.Entities:
Keywords: Arterial pressure monitoring system; Dynamic response; Intraarterial catheter diameter; Invasive blood pressure monitoring
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33527182 DOI: 10.1007/s10877-021-00663-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Monit Comput ISSN: 1387-1307 Impact factor: 2.502