Key result
Fluid-filled 6F catheters overestimate peak systolic pressure by ~24% compared to pressure wires in vitro.
Why the study?
Does a 6F fluid-filled catheter compared to a 0.014'' pressure wire cause measurement errors in peak systolic pressure and pulse wave velocity in an in-vitro pulsatile flow phantom?
Does a 6F fluid-filled catheter compared to a 0.014'' pressure wire cause measurement errors in peak systolic pressure and pulse wave velocity in an in-vitro pulsatile flow phantom?
Effect estimate: 24% overestimation
Fluid-filled catheters can significantly overestimate peak systolic pressure and pulse wave velocity compared to pressure wires, even at clinically acceptable radius ratios, due to increased flow resistance and frequency damping.
May bias peak pressure readings during catheterization; challenges routine fluid-filled catheter use and leaves open need for in-vivo validation.
Accurate measurement of blood pressure is important because it is a biomarker for cardiovascular disease. Diagnostic catheterization is routinely used for pressure acquisition in vessels despite being subject to significant measurement errors. To investigate these errors, this study compares pressure measurement using two different techniques in vitro and numerical simulations. Pressure was acquired in a pulsatile flow phantom using a 6F fluid-filled catheter and a 0.014'' pressure wire, which is considered the current gold standard. Numerical simulations of the experimental set-up with and without a catheter were also performed. Despite the low catheter-to-vessel radius ratio, the catheter traces showed a 24% peak systolic pressure overestimation compared to the wire. The numerical models replicated this difference and indicated the cause for overestimation was the increased flow resistance due to the presence of the catheter. Further, the higher frequency pressure oscillations observed in the wire and numerical data were absent in the catheter, resulting in an overestimation of the pulse wave velocity with the latter modality. These results show that catheter geometry produces significant measurement bias in both the peak pressure and the waveform shape even with radius ratios considered acceptable in clinical practice. The wire allows for more accurate pressure quantification, in agreement with the numerical model without a catheter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vecchi et al. (2014) studied Blood pressure measurement. 6F fluid-filled catheter vs. 0.014'' pressure wire was evaluated on Peak systolic pressure (24% overestimation). A 6F fluid-filled catheter produced a 24% overestimation of peak systolic pressure compared to a 0.014'' pressure wire in an in-vitro pulsatile flow phantom.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: