Key result
Pulse Arrival Time shows poor correlation with blood pressure, limiting continuous non-invasive tracking utility.
Why the study?
Pulse arrival time has been proposed as a surrogate of pulse transit time for cuffless blood pressure monitoring, but the balance between its questioned accuracy and measurement simplicity has yet to be established.
Does Pulse Arrival Time (PAT) accurately estimate continuous blood pressure in ICU patients?
Observational (n=11)
No
Does Pulse Arrival Time (PAT) accurately estimate continuous blood pressure in ICU patients?
Effect estimate: Pearson correlation r = -0.5 for systolic BP and -0.42 for diastolic BP
Pulse arrival time has limited accuracy as a surrogate for continuous non-invasive blood pressure estimation in ICU patients, though it may indicate wide trend changes.
PAT should not yet guide ICU BP management; hypothesis-generating for refined cuffless monitoring in broader cohorts.
A variety of techniques based on the indirect measurement of blood pressure (BP) by Pulse Transit Time (PTT) have been explored over the past few years. Such an approach has the potential in providing continuous and non-invasive beat to beat blood pressure without the use of a cuff. Pulse Arrival Time (PAT) which includes the cardiac pre-ejection period has been proposed as a surrogate of PTT, however, the balance between its questioned accuracy and measurement simplicity has yet to be established. The present work assessed the degree of linear relationship between PAT and blood pressure on 96 h of continuous electrocardiography and invasive radial blood pressure waveforms in a group of 11 young ICU patients. Participants were selected according to strict exclusion criteria including no use of vasoactive medications and presence of clinical conditions associated with cardiovascular diseases. The average range of variation for diastolic BP was 60 to 79 mmHg while systolic BP varied between 123 and 158 mmHg in the study database. The overall Pearson correlation coefficient for systolic and diastolic blood pressure was -0.5 and -0.42, respectively, while the mean absolute error was 3.9 and 7.6 mmHg. It was concluded that the utilization of PAT for the continuous non-invasive blood pressure estimation is rather limited according to the experimental setup, nonetheless the correlation coefficient performed better when the range of variation of blood pressure was high over periods of 30 min suggesting that PAT has the potential to be used as indicator of changes relating to hypertensive or hypotensive episodes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Escobar-Restrepo et al. (2018) conducted an observational in ICU patients without cardiovascular disease (n=11). Pulse Arrival Time (PAT) measurement vs. Invasive radial blood pressure waveform was evaluated on Pearson correlation coefficient and mean absolute error between PAT and blood pressure (Pearson correlation r = -0.5 for systolic BP and -0.42 for diastolic BP). Pulse Arrival Time showed a moderate to low linear relationship with systolic (r = -0.5) and diastolic (r = -0.42) blood pressure, indicating limited utility for continuous non-invasive blood pressure estimation.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: