Key result
Indirect cuff blood pressure shows poor agreement with direct arterial measurement in anesthetized minipigs.
Why the study?
It is unclear whether indirect blood pressure measurement is compatible with direct measurement in minipigs and how animal posture affects these measurements.
Does indirect blood pressure measurement using a compressive cuff agree with direct blood pressure measurement via femoral artery catheterization in anesthetized minipigs?
Observational (n=32)
No
Does indirect blood pressure measurement using a compressive cuff agree with direct blood pressure measurement via femoral artery catheterization in anesthetized minipigs?
Indirect blood pressure measurement using a compressive cuff is not compatible with direct measurement via femoral artery catheterization in minipigs, highlighting the risk of misinterpreting anesthetized patients' conditions.
Cautions against relying solely on cuff-based indirect BP in anesthetized minipigs; leaves open need for position-specific validation studies.
Blood pressure (BP) measurement plays a pivotal role in veterinary medicine for diagnosing cardiovascular disorders and monitoring anesthesia of animals.Although indirect BP measurement has been widely applied to monitor BP because of its convenience and non-invasiveness, it is still unclear whether indirect BP measurement is compatible with direct BP measurement in minipigs.In addition, the effect of animal posture during BP measurement is not well understood in minipigs despite its importance to cardiovascular performance.Therefore, both systolic and diastolic arterial BPs in minipigs were measured via femoral artery catheterization for direct BP measurement and using a compressive cuff as an indirect BP measurement under the dorsal or right lateral recumbent postures.Numerical values were processed by the Bland-Altman method to calculate the bias ± SD and the limits of agreement (LOA).In accordance with the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine guidelines, the results between direct and indirect BP measurements were determined as apparent disagreements in both systolic and diastolic arterial BPs under all postures because of large bias ± SD and wide LOA.The results of the present will help prevent misinterpretation of the anesthetized patient's condition during monitoring of BP by indirect measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Healthy anesthetized minipigs (n=32). Indirect blood pressure measurement (compressive cuff) vs. Direct blood pressure measurement (femoral artery catheterization) was evaluated on Agreement between direct and indirect systolic arterial blood pressure in dorsal recumbency (Bland-Altman analysis) (Bias -3.6 mmHg, 95% CI -40.1 to 32.9). Indirect blood pressure measurement using a compressive cuff showed apparent disagreement with direct measurement in anesthetized minipigs, demonstrating a bias of -3.6 mmHg and wide limits of agreement (-40.1 to 32.9 mmHg) for systolic pressure in dorsal recumbency.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: