Key result
Non-invasive automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement showed an overall bias of 7.2 mmHg compared to invasive measurement in anesthetized children, increasing to 15 mmHg during hypotension.
Why the study?
Few automated oscillometric blood pressure devices have been validated in children during anesthesia, and few studies have assessed agreement between invasive and non-invasive blood pressure measurements in children.
Does non-invasive automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement agree with invasive blood pressure measurement in children undergoing cardiac catheterization with general anesthesia?
Observational (n=254)
Yes
Does non-invasive automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement agree with invasive blood pressure measurement in children undergoing cardiac catheterization with general anesthesia?
Mean Difference: 7.2
Automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement shows clinically significant bias compared to invasive monitoring in anesthetized children undergoing cardiac catheterization, particularly during hypotension.
Further validation of oscillometric BP devices needed in anesthetized children; leaves open interchangeability with invasive monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Blood pressure measurement is a standard of monitoring during general anesthesia. Invasive measurement is considered the gold standard but is less commonly used than non-invasive. Automated oscillometric blood pressure devices measure the mean arterial pressure (MAP) and use an algorithm to determine the systolic and diastolic pressures. Few devices have been validated in children, particularly during anesthesia. Few studies have assessed the agreement between invasive and non-invasive blood pressure measurements in children. METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective observational study of children under 16 years undergoing cardiac catheterization with general anesthesia. Paired invasive and non-invasive blood pressure measurements were recorded for each patient during stable periods of the procedure. Correlation within and between sites was assessed with Pearson's correlation coefficient, and agreement was examined using Bland-Altman methodology to determine bias. Agreement during episodes of hypotension and for age and weight was also determined. Bias greater than 5 mmHg and standard deviation greater than 8 mmHg was considered clinically significant. The primary end point was agreement of MAP measurements. RESULTS: A total of 683 paired blood pressure values were collected from 254 children in three pediatric hospitals. Median [IQR] age and weight were 3 [1-7] years and 13.9 [8-23] Kg. The overall bias (SD) for mean arterial pressure values was 7.2 (11.4) mmHg. During hypotension (190 readings), the bias (SD) was 15 (11.0) mmHg. The non-invasive MAP was frequently higher than invasive MAP during infancy, and lower in older children. CONCLUSION: Automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement is unreliable in anesthetized children during cardiac catheterization. Invasive pressure measurement should be considered for high-risk cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Beringer et al. (2023) conducted an observational in children undergoing cardiac catheterization with general anesthesia (n=254). Non-invasive automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement vs. Invasive blood pressure measurement was evaluated on agreement of MAP measurements (bias 7.2 mmHg). Non-invasive automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement showed an overall bias of 7.2 mmHg compared to invasive measurement in anesthetized children, increasing to 15 mmHg during hypotension.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: