Younghoon Kwon1, Patrick L Stafford2, Martin C Baruch3, Sung-Hoon Kim4, Yeilim Cho1, Sula Mazimba2, Lawrence W Gimple2. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 2. Department of Medicine, University of Virginia. 3. Caretaker Medical, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA. 4. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is an unmet need for noninvasive continuous blood pressure (BP) monitoring technologies in various clinical settings. Continuous and noninvasive central aortic BP monitoring is technically not feasible currently, but if realized, would provide more accurate and real-time global hemodynamic information than any form of peripheral arterial BP monitoring in an acute care setting. As part of our efforts to develop such, herein we examined the tracking correlation between noninvasively-derived peripheral arterial BP by Caretaker device against invasively measured central aortic BP. METHODS: Beat-to-beat BP by Caretaker was recorded simultaneously with central aortic BP measured in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pearson's correlation was also derived for SBP and DBP. A trend comparison analysis of the beat-to-beat BP change was performed using a four-quadrant plot analysis with the exclusion zones of 0.5 mmHg/s to determine concordance, (i.e. the direction of beat-to-beat changes in SBP and DBP). RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were included in the study. A total of 31 369 beats representing an average of 17.3 min of recording were used for analysis. The trend analysis yielded concordances of 84.4 and 83.5% for SBP and DBP, respectively. Respective correlations (Pearson's r) for SBP and DBP trends were 0.87 and 0.86 (P < 0.01). Tracking of beat-to-beat BP by Caretaker showed excellent concordance and correlation in the direction and the degree of BP change with central aortic BP, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study supports the satisfactory performance of the Caretaker device in continuous tracking of central aortic BP beat-to-beat BP and provides a basis to develop an algorithm for absolute central aortic BP estimation in the future.
OBJECTIVE: There is an unmet need for noninvasive continuous blood pressure (BP) monitoring technologies in various clinical settings. Continuous and noninvasive central aortic BP monitoring is technically not feasible currently, but if realized, would provide more accurate and real-time global hemodynamic information than any form of peripheral arterial BP monitoring in an acute care setting. As part of our efforts to develop such, herein we examined the tracking correlation between noninvasively-derived peripheral arterial BP by Caretaker device against invasively measured central aortic BP. METHODS: Beat-to-beat BP by Caretaker was recorded simultaneously with central aortic BP measured in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pearson's correlation was also derived for SBP and DBP. A trend comparison analysis of the beat-to-beat BP change was performed using a four-quadrant plot analysis with the exclusion zones of 0.5 mmHg/s to determine concordance, (i.e. the direction of beat-to-beat changes in SBP and DBP). RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were included in the study. A total of 31 369 beats representing an average of 17.3 min of recording were used for analysis. The trend analysis yielded concordances of 84.4 and 83.5% for SBP and DBP, respectively. Respective correlations (Pearson's r) for SBP and DBP trends were 0.87 and 0.86 (P < 0.01). Tracking of beat-to-beat BP by Caretaker showed excellent concordance and correlation in the direction and the degree of BP change with central aortic BP, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study supports the satisfactory performance of the Caretaker device in continuous tracking of central aortic BP beat-to-beat BP and provides a basis to develop an algorithm for absolute central aortic BP estimation in the future.
Authors: Bryan Williams; Peter S Lacy; Simon M Thom; Kennedy Cruickshank; Alice Stanton; David Collier; Alun D Hughes; H Thurston; Michael O'Rourke Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-02-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alberto P Avolio; Luc M Van Bortel; Pierre Boutouyrie; John R Cockcroft; Carmel M McEniery; Athanase D Protogerou; Mary J Roman; Michel E Safar; Patrick Segers; Harold Smulyan Journal: Hypertension Date: 2009-06-29 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Stacey S Hickson; Mark Butlin; Fraz A Mir; Johann Graggaber; Joseph Cheriyan; Fakhar Khan; Andrew A Grace; John R Cockcroft; Ian B Wilkinson; Carmel M McEniery Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Bernd Saugel; Phillip Hoppe; Julia Y Nicklas; Karim Kouz; Annmarie Körner; Julia C Hempel; Jaap J Vos; Gerhard Schön; Thomas W L Scheeren Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Martin C Baruch; Darren Er Warburton; Shannon Sd Bredin; Anita Cote; David W Gerdt; Charles M Adkins Journal: Nonlinear Biomed Phys Date: 2011-01-12