Cargando…

Prospective clinical study to evaluate an oscillometric blood pressure monitor in pet rabbits

BACKGROUND: Rabbits are particularly sensitive to develop hypotension during sedation or anaesthesia. Values of systolic or mean non-invasive arterial blood pressure below 80 or 60 mmHg respectively are common under anaesthesia despite an ongoing surgery. A reliable method of monitoring arterial blo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bellini, Luca, Veladiano, Irene A., Schrank, Magdalena, Candaten, Matteo, Mollo, Antonio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5827987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29482612
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-018-1369-4
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Rabbits are particularly sensitive to develop hypotension during sedation or anaesthesia. Values of systolic or mean non-invasive arterial blood pressure below 80 or 60 mmHg respectively are common under anaesthesia despite an ongoing surgery. A reliable method of monitoring arterial blood pressure is extremely important, although invasive technique is not always possible due to the anatomy and dimension of the artery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between a new oscillometric device for non-invasive arterial blood pressure measurement and the invasive method. Moreover the trending ability of the device, ability to identify changes in the same direction with the invasive methods, was evaluated as well as the sensibility of the device in identifying hypotension arbitrarily defined as invasive arterial blood pressure below 80 or 60 mmHg. RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements showed a poor agreement between the two methods; the oscillometric device overestimated the invasive arterial blood pressure, particularly at high arterial pressure values. The same analysis repeated considering oscillometric measurement that match invasive mean pressure lower or equal to 60 mmHg showed a decrease in biases and limits of agreement between methods. The trending ability of the device, evaluated with both the 4-quadrant plot and the polar plot was poor. Concordance rate of mean arterial blood pressure was higher than systolic and diastolic pressure although inferior to 90%. The sensibility of the device in detecting hypotension defined as systolic or mean invasive arterial blood pressure lower than 80 or 60 mmHg was superior for mean oscillometric pressure rather than systolic. A sensitivity of 92% was achieved with an oscillometric measurement for mean pressure below 65 mmHg instead of 60 mmHg. Non-invasive systolic blood pressure is less sensitive as indicator of hypotension regardless of the cutoff limit considered. CONCLUSIONS: Although mean invasive arterial blood pressure is overestimated by the device, the sensitivity of this non-invasive oscillometric monitor in detecting invasive mean pressure below 60 mmHg is acceptable but a cutoff value of 65 mmHg needs to be used.