Upper limb dimensions in adults presenting for elective surgery - implications for blood pressure measurement

Invasive Blood Pressure Measurement and In-hospital Mortality in Critically Ill Patients With Hypertension

Background: Invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurement is common in the intensive care unit, although its association with in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with hypertension is poorly understood.

Methods and Results: A total of 11,732 critically ill patients with hypertension from the eICU-Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD) were enrolled. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether they received IBP. The primary outcome in this study was in-hospital mortality. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighing (IPTW) models were used to balance the confounding covariates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between IBP measurement and hospital mortality. The IBP group had a higher in-hospital mortality rate than the no IBP group in the primary cohort [238 (8.7%) vs. 581 (6.5%), p < 0.001]. In the PSM cohort, the IBP group had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than the no IBP group [187 (8.0%) vs. 241 (10.3%), p = 0.006]. IBP measurement was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in the PSM cohort (odds ratio, 0.73, 95% confidence interval, 0.59–0.92) and in the IPTW cohort (odds ratio, 0.81, 95% confidence interval, 0.67–0.99). Sensitivity analyses showed similar results in the subgroups with high body mass index and no sepsis.

Conclusions: In conclusion, IBP measurement was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with hypertension, highlighting the importance of IBP measurement in the intensive care unit.

ClearSight™ finger cuff versus invasive arterial pressure measurement in patients with body mass index above 45 kg/m2

BACKGROUND

Measuring blood pressure in patients with obesity is challenging. The ClearSight™ finger cuff (FC) uses the vascular unloading technique to provide continuous non-invasive blood pressure measurements. We aimed to test the agreement of the FC with invasive radial arterial monitoring (INV) in patients with obesity.

METHODS

Participants had a body mass index (BMI) ≥45 kg/m² and underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery. FC and INV measurements were obtained simultaneously every 5 min on each patient, following induction of anesthesia. Agreement over time was assessed using modified Bland-Altman plots and error grid analysis permitted clinical interpretation of the results. Four-quadrant plots allowed assessment of concordance in blood pressure changes.

RESULTS

The 30 participants had a median (IQR) BMI of 50.2 kg/m² (IQR 48.3-55.3). The observed bias (SD, 95% limits of agreement) for systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 14.3 mmHg (14.1, -13.4 - 42.0), 5.2 mmHg (10.9, -16.0 - 26.5) for mean arterial pressure (MAP) and 2.6 mmHg (10.8, -18.6 - 23.8) for diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Error grid analysis showed that the proportion of readings in risk zones A-E were 90.8, 6.5, 2.7, 0 and 0% for SBP and 91.4, 4.3, 4.3, 0 and 0% for MAP, respectively. Discordance occurred in ≤8% of pairs for consecutive change in SBP, MAP and DBP.

CONCLUSIONS

The vascular unloading technique was not adequately in agreement with radial arterial monitoring. Evaluation in a larger sample is required before recommending this technique for intraoperative monitoring of patients with BMI ≥45 kg/m².