Comparison of oscillometric, non-invasive and invasive arterial pressure monitoring in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery - a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study

Jonathan Hansen, Markus Pohlmann, Jan H Beckmann, Phil Klose, Matthias Gruenewald, Jochen Renner, Ulf Lorenzen, Gunnar Elke, Jonathan Hansen, Markus Pohlmann, Jan H Beckmann, Phil Klose, Matthias Gruenewald, Jochen Renner, Ulf Lorenzen, Gunnar Elke

Abstract

Background: Oscillometric, non-invasive blood pressure measurement (NIBP) is the first choice of blood pressure monitoring in the majority of low and moderate risk surgeries. In patients with morbid obesity, however, it is subject to several limitations. The aim was to compare arterial pressure monitoring by NIBP and a non-invasive finger-cuff technology (Nexfin®) with the gold-standard invasive arterial pressure (IAP).

Methods: In this secondary analysis of a prospective observational, single centre cohort study, systolic (SAP), diastolic (DAP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured at 16 defined perioperative time points including posture changes, fluid bolus administration and pneumoperitoneum (PP) in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Absolute arterial pressures by NIBP, Nexfin® and IAP were compared using correlation and Bland Altman analyses. Interchangeability was defined by a mean difference ≤ 5 mmHg (SD ≤8 mmHg). Percentage error (PE) was calculated as an additional statistical estimate. For hemodynamic trending, concordance rates were analysed according to the Critchley criterion.

Results: Sixty patients (mean body mass index of 49.2 kg/m2) were enrolled and data from 56 finally analysed. Pooled blood pressure values of all time points showed a significant positive correlation for both NIPB and Nexfin® versus IAP. Pooled PE for NIBP versus IAP was 37% (SAP), 35% (DAP) and 30% (MAP), for Nexfin versus IAP 23% (SAP), 26% (DAP) and 22% (MAP). Correlation of MAP was best and PE lowest before induction of anesthesia for NIBP versus IAP (r = 0.72; PE 24%) and after intraoperative fluid bolus administration for Nexfin® versus IAP (r = 0.88; PE: 17.2%). Concordance of MAP trending was 90% (SAP 85%, DAP 89%) for NIBP and 91% (SAP 90%, DAP 86%) for Nexfin®. MAP trending was best during intraoperative ATP positioning for NIBP (97%) and at induction of anesthesia for Nexfin® (97%).

Conclusion: As compared with IAP, interchangeability of absolute pressure values could neither be shown for NIBP nor Nexfin®, however, NIBP showed poorer overall correlation and precision. Overall trending ability was generally high with Nexfin® surpassing NIBP. Nexfin® may likely render individualized decision-making in the management of different hemodynamic stresses during laparoscopic bariatric surgery, particularly where NIBP cannot be reliably established.

Trial registration: The non-interventional, observational study was registered retrospectively at ( NCT03184285 ) on June 12, 2017.

Keywords: Bariatric surgery; Blood pressure; Clear sight; Finger-cuff; Nexfin; Non-invasive monitoring; Obesity; Vascular unloading technique.

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have provided information on potential conflicts of interests directly or indirectly related to the work submitted. All other authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study participant flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Pooled correlation and Bland-Altman analyses for all MAP data pairs measured by NIBP and Nexfin® versus IAP. Panels A and B: NIBP (A) or Nexfin® (B) (y-axis) derived values are plotted against IAP values (x-axis), with correlation coefficient (r) and P value displayed in the diagrams. Panels C and D: Bland-Altman plots, where differences of IAP and NIBP (C) or Nexfin® (D) (y-axis) are plotted against their common mean (x-axis). The bold dotted lines display the limits of agreement, where 95% (bias ±1.96 standard deviation of the difference) of all measurements are located. The middle line shows the mean difference (bias). Percentage error and bias are displayed in the diagrams. MAP: Mean arterial pressure, PE: Percentage error, IAP: Invasive arterial pressure, NIBP: Non-invasive oscillometric blood pressure, r: Correlation coefficient
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bland Altman analyses for hypotension and hypertension. Bland-Altman Plots of all values, where MAP recorded by IAP was ≤50 mmHg (A and C) or > 70 mmHg (B and D). Differences of IAP and Nexfin®/NIBP (y-axis) are plotted against their common mean (x-axis). Bold dotted lines display the limits of agreement, where 95% (bias±1.96 standard deviation of the difference) of all measurements are located. The middle line shows the mean difference (bias). Percentage error and bias are displayed in the diagrams. MAP: Mean arterial Pressure, PE: Percentage error, IAP: Invasive arterial pressure
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Trending analysis for Nexfin® or NIBP measured MAP. Four square plots of the concordance for MAP values recorded by NIBP (Panel A) or Nexfin® (Panel B) vs. IAP. The y-axis shows changes (as percentages) of IAP, the x-axis shows changes (as percentages) of Nexfin® or NIBP derived arterial pressure measurements for the total data sample. The left lower and right upper quadrants include all arterial pressure values with the same (negative or positive) change. Changes with less than 5% were excluded from portrayal and statistical analysis. One data pair lies outside the depicted range in Panel A. MAP: Mean arterial pressure, NIBP: Non-invasive oscillometric blood pressure, IAP: Invasive arterial pressure

References

    1. Charlson ME, MacKenzie CR, Gold JP, Ales KL, Topkins M, Shires GT. Intraoperative blood pressure. What patterns identify patients at risk for postoperative complications? Ann Surg. 1990;212:567–580. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199011000-00003.
    1. Nuttall G, Burckhardt J, Hadley A, Kane S, Kor D, Marienau MS, et al. Surgical and patient risk factors for severe arterial line complications in adults. Anesthesiology. 2016;124:590–597. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000967.
    1. Maxwell MH, Waks AU, Schroth PC, Karam M, Dornfeld LP. Error in blood-pressure measurement due to incorrect cuff size in obese patients. Lancet Lond Engl. 1982;2:33–36. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(82)91163-1.
    1. Anast N, Olejniczak M, Ingrande J, Brock-Utne J. The impact of blood pressure cuff location on the accuracy of noninvasive blood pressure measurements in obese patients: an observational study. Can J Anaesth J Can Anesth. 2016;63:298–306. doi: 10.1007/s12630-015-0509-6.
    1. Lakhal K, Macq C, Ehrmann S, Boulain T, Capdevila X. Noninvasive monitoring of blood pressure in the critically ill: reliability according to the cuff site (arm, thigh, or ankle) Crit Care Med. 2012;40:1207–1213. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31823dae42.
    1. Leblanc M-È, Auclair A, Leclerc J, Bussières J, Agharazii M, Hould F-S, et al. Blood pressure measurement in severely obese patients: validation of the forearm approach in different arm positions. Am J Hypertens. 2019;32:175–185. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpy152.
    1. Hauner H, Moss A, Berg A, Bischoff SC, Colombo-Benkmann M, Ellrott T, et al. Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Prävention und Therapie der Adipositas. Adipositas - Ursachen Folgeerkrankungen Ther. 2014;08:179–221. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1618857.
    1. Cullen A, Ferguson A. Perioperative management of the severely obese patient: a selective pathophysiological review. Perioper Manag Sev Obese Patient Sel Pathophysiol Rev. 2012;59:974–996.
    1. Mechanick JI, Apovian C, Brethauer S, Garvey WT, Joffe AM, Kim J, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures – 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, the Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & bariatric surgery, obesity medicine association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16:175–247. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2019.10.025.
    1. Organization WH. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic: World Health Organization; 2000.
    1. Sjöström L, Larsson B, Carlsson B, Jacobson P, Näslund I, Ågren G. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:741–52.
    1. Truijen J, van Lieshout JJ, Wesselink WA, Westerhof BE. Noninvasive continuous hemodynamic monitoring. J Clin Monit Comput. 2012;26:267–278. doi: 10.1007/s10877-012-9375-8.
    1. Vos JJ, Poterman M, Mooyaart EAQ, Weening M, Struys MMRF, Scheeren TWL, et al. Comparison of continuous non-invasive finger arterial pressure monitoring with conventional intermittent automated arm arterial pressure measurement in patients under general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113:67–74. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu091.
    1. Martina JR, Westerhof BE, J v G, EMFH d B, Truijen J, Kim Y-S, et al. Noninvasive continuous arterial blood pressure monitoring with Nexfin®. Anesthesiology. 2012;116:1092–1103. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31824f94ed.
    1. Balzer F, Habicher M, Sander M, Sterr J, Scholz S, Feldheiser A, et al. Comparison of the non-invasive Nexfin® monitor with conventional methods for the measurement of arterial blood pressure in moderate risk orthopaedic surgery patients. J Int Med Res. 2016;44:832–843. doi: 10.1177/0300060516635383.
    1. RBP d W, de Wit F, Geerts BF, van Vliet AL, Aarts LPHJ, Vuyk J, et al. Non-invasive continuous arterial pressure and pulse pressure variation measured with Nexfin® in patients following major upper abdominal surgery: a comparative study. Anaesthesia. 2016;71:788–797. doi: 10.1111/anae.13503.
    1. Meidert AS, Nold JS, Hornung R, Paulus AC, Zwißler B, Czerner S. The impact of continuous non-invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring on blood pressure stability during general anaesthesia in orthopaedic patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2017;34:716–722. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000690.
    1. Maheshwari K, Khanna S, Bajracharya GR, Makarova N, Riter Q, Raza S, et al. A randomized trial of continuous noninvasive blood pressure monitoring during noncardiac surgery. Anesth Analg. 2018;127:424–431. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003482.
    1. Saugel B, Hoppe P, Nicklas JY, Kouz K, Körner A, Hempel JC, et al. Continuous noninvasive pulse wave analysis using finger cuff technologies for arterial blood pressure and cardiac output monitoring in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2020;125:25–37. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.03.013.
    1. Rogge DE, Nicklas JY, Schön G, Grothe O, Haas SA, Reuter DA, et al. Continuous noninvasive arterial pressure monitoring in obese patients during bariatric surgery: an evaluation of the vascular unloading technique (Clearsight system) Anesth Analg. 2019;128:477–483. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003943.
    1. Sakai Y, M TY, Oyama T, Murakami C, Kakuta N, Tanaka K. Noninvasive continuous blood pressure monitoring by the ClearSight system during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Med Investig. 2018;65:1.2:69–73. doi: 10.2152/jmi.65.69.
    1. Noto A, Sanfilippo F, De Salvo G, Crimi C, Benedetto F, Watson X, et al. Noninvasive continuous arterial pressure monitoring with Clearsight during awake carotid endarterectomy: a prospective observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2019;36:144–152. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000938.
    1. Rogge DE, Nicklas JY, Haas SA, Reuter DA, Saugel B. Continuous noninvasive arterial pressure monitoring using the vascular unloading technique (CNAP system) in obese patients during. Laparoscopic Bariatric Operations. 2018; . Accessed 4 Apr 2020.
    1. Pouwels S, Lascaris B, Nienhuijs SW, Arthur Bouwman R, Buise MP. Validation of the Nexfin® non-invasive continuous blood pressure monitoring validated against Riva-Rocci/Korotkoff in a bariatric patient population. J Clin Anesth. 2017;39:89–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.03.029.
    1. Tobias JD, McKee C, Herz D, Teich S, Sohner P, Rice J, et al. Accuracy of the CNAP™ monitor, a noninvasive continuous blood pressure device, in providing beat-to-beat blood pressure measurements during bariatric surgery in severely obese adolescents and young adults. J Anesth. 2014;28:861–865. doi: 10.1007/s00540-014-1835-5.
    1. Schumann R, Meidert AS, Bonney I, Koutentis C, Wesselink W, Kouz K, et al. Intraoperative blood pressure monitoring in obese patients: arterial catheter, finger cuff, and Oscillometry. Anesthesiology. 2020. 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003636.
    1. Eley V, Christensen R, Guy L, Wyssusek K, Pelecanos A, Dodd B, et al. ClearSight™ finger cuff versus invasive arterial pressure measurement in patients with body mass index above 45 kg/m2. BMC Anesthesiol. 2021;21:152. doi: 10.1186/s12871-021-01374-x.
    1. Lorenzen U, Pohlmann M, Hansen J, Klose P, Gruenewald M, Renner J, et al. Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020;20:196. doi: 10.1186/s12871-020-01110-x.
    1. Stergiou GS, Palatini P, Asmar R, Ioannidis JP, Kollias A, Lacy P, et al. Recommendations and practical guidance for performing and reporting validation studies according to the universal standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices by the Association for the Advancement of medical instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) J Hypertens. 2019;37:459–466. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002039.
    1. Ilies C, Bauer M, Berg P, Rosenberg J, Hedderich J, Bein B, et al. Investigation of the agreement of a continuous non-invasive arterial pressure device in comparison with invasive radial artery measurement. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108:202–210. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer394.
    1. Klose P, Lorenzen U, Berndt R, Borzikowsky C, Hill M, Gruenewald M, et al. Continuous noninvasive monitoring of arterial pressure using the vascular unloading technique in comparison to the invasive gold standard in elderly comorbid patients: a prospective observational study. Health Sci Rep. 2020;3:e204. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.204.
    1. Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. J R Stat Soc Ser Stat. 1983;32:307–317.
    1. Martin Bland J, DouglasG A. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327:307–310. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
    1. Critchley LA, Critchley JA. A meta-analysis of studies using bias and precision statistics to compare cardiac output measurement techniques. J Clin Monit Comput. 1999;15:85–91. doi: 10.1023/A:1009982611386.
    1. Maggi R, Viscardi V, Furukawa T, Brignole M. Non-invasive continuous blood pressure monitoring of tachycardic episodes during interventional electrophysiology. Europace. 2010;12:1616–1622. doi: 10.1093/europace/euq333.
    1. Muntner P, Shimbo D, Carey RM, Charleston JB, Gaillard T, Misra S, et al. Measurement of blood pressure in humans: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertens Dallas Tex. 1979;2019(73):e35–e66.
    1. Lee S, Chung J, Bae J, Cho YJ, Nam K, Jeon Y. Continuous non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring (ClearSight system) and ankle blood pressure measurements as alternatives to conventional arm blood pressure. J Clin Med. 2020;9:3615. doi: 10.3390/jcm9113615.
    1. Gellert G, Bramlage P. Use of the ClearSight® system for continuous noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring during heart valve interventions: review of the literature and single-site experience. Heart Surg Forum. 2018;21:E476–E483. doi: 10.1532/hsf.2177.
    1. Fellahi J-L, Futier E, Vaisse C, Collange O, Huet O, Loriau J, et al. Perioperative hemodynamic optimization: from guidelines to implementation—an experts’ opinion paper. Ann Intensive Care. 2021;11:58. doi: 10.1186/s13613-021-00845-1.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren