The perfusion index measured by the pulse oximeter affects the agreement between ClearSight and the arterial catheter-based blood pressures: A prospective observational study

Comparison of the ClearSight™ finger cuff monitor versus invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

To determine the acceptability of the ClearSight™ system (Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA) for continuous blood pressure monitoring during elective cardiac surgery compared with arterial catheterization.

METHODS

We enrolled 30 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery in a prospective observational study. Blood pressure measurements were recorded every 10 sec intraoperatively. We determined agreement based on the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) recommendations. Statistical analysis included fixed bias (difference of measurements between methods), percentage error (accuracy between ClearSight measurement and expected measurement from arterial line), and interchangeability (ability to substitute ClearSight monitor without effecting overall outcome of analysis). We used a paired samples t test to compare the time required for placing each monitor.

RESULTS

We found fixed bias in the differences between the ClearSight monitor and invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in systolic blood pressure (SBP; mean difference, 8.7; P < 0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP; mean difference, -2.2; P < 0.001), but not in mean arterial pressure (MAP; mean difference, -0.5; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed that the means of the limits of agreement were greater than 5 mm Hg for SBP, DBP, and MAP. The percentage errors for SBP, DBP, and MAP were lower than the cutoff we calculated from the invasive arterial blood pressure measurements. Average interchangeability rates were 38% for SBP, 50% for DBP, and 50% for MAP. Placement of the ClearSight finger cuff was significantly faster compared with arterial catheterization (mean [standard deviation], 1.7 [0.6] min vs 5.6 [4.1] min; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective observational study, we did not find the ClearSight system to be an acceptable substitute for invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients according to AAMI guidelines. Nevertheless, based on statistical standards, there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT05825937 ); first submitted 11 April 2023.

Risk factors for poor performance in finger cuff non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure: A prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Compared to the invasive technique, non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure favors easier and faster implementation while potentially sacrificing some reliability. This may be particularly true for the Clearsight™ system (Edwards Lifesciences), which enables continuous monitoring. We evaluated the risk factors for its poor performance.

METHODS

Patients with an arterial catheter and stable mean arterial pressure (MAP) over a 5-min period were included. Six pairs of invasive and Clearsight measurements of MAP were collected and the bias between the two techniques was calculated. Poor performance of the Clearsight™ system was defined as either a failure to measure and display MAP or displaying an erroneous MAP (individual bias > 5 mmHg). Fingertip perfusion was assessed using the plethysmographic perfusion index (PI) and the capillary refill time (CRT).

RESULTS

Among 152 ICU patients (MAP of 81 ± 14 mmHg, norepinephrine in 78 [51%]), 78 (51%) experienced a poor performance of the Clearsight™ system: failure to display MAP in 19 (13%) patients, and erroneous value displayed in 59 (44%). In multivariate analysis, PI ≤ 0.85% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.94 [95% confidence interval (95%CI):1.34;6.45]), CRT > 4 s (aOR = 5.28 [95%CI 1.39;20.05]), and the presence of hand edema (aOR = 2.06 [95%CI 1.01;4.21]) were associated with a higher likelihood of poor performance. Cardiac arrhythmia (aOR = 1.39 [95%CI 0.64;3.02]) and other tested variables were not associated with poor performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the included patients exhibited poor Clearsight™ system performance. Our results caution against using finger cuff arterial pressure monitoring in patients with low PI (≤0.85%), protracted CRT (>4 s), or hand edema.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04269382, Dr. G. Muller, February 13, 2020. https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04269382.

Noninvasive Assessment of Arterial Pulse-Pressure Variation During General Anesthesia: Clinical Evaluation of a New High-Fidelity Upper Arm Cuff

OBJECTIVES

To compare noninvasive pulse-pressure variation (PPV) measurements obtained from a new high-fidelity upper arm cuff using a hydraulic coupling technique to corresponding intraarterial PPV measurements.

DESIGN

The authors used prospective multicenter comparison and development studies for the new high-fidelity upper arm cuff.

SETTING

The study was performed in the departments of Anesthesiology at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Hospital, the University Hospital of Bonn, and the RoMed Hospital in Rosenheim (all Germany).

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 153 patients were enrolled, undergoing major abdominal surgery or neurosurgery with mechanical ventilation. For the evaluation of PPV, 1,467 paired measurements in 107 patients were available after exclusion due to predefined quality criteria.

INTERVENTIONS

Simultaneous measurements of PPV were performed from a reference femoral arterial catheter (PPV_ref) and the high-fidelity upper arm cuff (PPV_cuff). The new device uses a semirigid conical shell. It incorporates a hydraulic sensor pad with a pressure transducer, leading to a tissue pressure-pulse contour with all characteristics of an arterial- pulse contour.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The comparative analysis of the included measurements showed that PPV_ref and PPV_cuff were closely correlated (r = 0.92). The mean of the differences between PPV_ref and PPV_cuff was 0.1 ± 2.0%, with 95% limits of agreement between -4.1% and 3.9%. To track absolute changes in PPV >2%, the concordance rate between the 2 methods was 93%.

CONCLUSIONS

The new high-fidelity upper arm cuff method provided a clinically reliable estimate of PPV.

D. Use of peripheral perfusion index (PI) as a predictor of cardiovascular complications in hospitalised Covid 19 patients - A pilot study

Introduction and Aim: Cardiovascular complications have been associated with fatality in Covid-19 patients. Reduced peripheral perfusion is a marker for cardiovascular dysfunction.  Peripheral Perfusion Index (PI) is a non-invasive measure of microvascular perfusion with regards to pulsatile arterial blood flow. The study was aimed at finding the utility of PI as a hemodynamic marker in Covid-19.   Materials and Methods: Observational study done on 58 hospitalised adult Covid-19 patients over a span of 6 days. Each day the hemodynamic parameters such as pulse rate, SpO2 and Peripheral Perfusion Index (PI) were measured using a finger pulse oximeter. Peripheral Blood pressure was measured using automated BP apparatus. Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) and pulse pressure (PP) was calculated.   Results: Correlation between PI and other parameters checked using Pearson’s test. There was significant positive correlation between PI and PP in day wise analysis during first 2 days with linear regression showing PP can be predicted as a dependant function from PI. This shows the association between PI and systemic cardiovascular function.   Conclusion: PI is a useful measure of peripheral microvascular perfusion and relates to systemic PP. It can be predicted from the results that PI can act as a reliable guide to predict the cardiovascular condition of the patient. As PI is measured from finger pulse oximeter, it is a non-invasive and easy-to-record method, which can be used by untrained personnel in Covid-19 patients.

The Use of Non-Invasive Continuous Blood Pressure Measuring (ClearSight®) during Central Neuraxial Anaesthesia for Caesarean Section—A Retrospective Validation Study

The close monitoring of blood pressure during a caesarean section performed under central neuraxial anaesthesia should be the standard of safe anaesthesia. As classical oscillometric and invasive blood pressure measuring have intrinsic disadvantages, we investigated a novel, non-invasive technique for continuous blood pressure measuring. Methods: In this monocentric, retrospective data analysis, the reliability of continuous non-invasive blood pressure measuring using ClearSight^® (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation) is validated in 31 women undergoing central neuraxial anaesthesia for caesarean section. In addition, patients and professionals evaluated ClearSight^® through questioning. Results: 139 measurements from 11 patients were included in the final analysis. Employing Bland–Altman analyses, we identified a bias of −10.8 mmHg for systolic, of −0.45 mmHg for diastolic and of +0.68 mmHg for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Pooling all paired measurements resulted in a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.7 for systolic, of 0.67 for diastolic and of 0.75 for mean arterial blood pressure. Compensating the interindividual differences in linear regressions of the paired measurements provided improved correlation coefficients of 0.73 for systolic, of 0.9 for diastolic and of 0.89 for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Discussion: Diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure are within an acceptable range of deviation from the reference method, according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) in the patient collective under study. Both patients and professionals prefer ClearSight^® to oscillometric blood pressure measurement in regard of comfort and handling.

Validation of Continuous Noninvasive Blood Pressure Monitoring Using Error Grid Analysis

BACKGROUND

Error grid analysis was recently proposed to compare blood pressure obtained by 2 measurement methods. This study aimed to compare continuous noninvasive blood pressure (CNBP) with invasive blood pressure (IBP) using the error grid analysis and investigate the confounding risk factors attributable to the differences between CNBP and IBP.

METHODS

Sixty adult patients undergoing general anesthesia were prospectively enrolled. Simultaneous comparative data regarding CNBP and IBP were collected. The Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to compare CNBP and IBP for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and mean blood pressure (MBP; acceptable accuracy: mean bias <5 mm Hg; standard deviation <8 mm Hg). The clinical relevance of the discrepancies between CNBP and IBP was evaluated by the error grid analysis, which classifies the differences into 5 zones from "no risk" (A) to "dangerous risk" (E). Additionally, an ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between the risk zones for MBP, classified by the error grid analysis and covariates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 10,663 pairs of CNBP/IBP were finally analyzed. The Bland-Altman analysis showed an acceptable accuracy with a bias of -3.3 ± 5.6 mm Hg for MBP but a poor accuracy with a bias of 5.4 ± 10.5 mm Hg for SBP. The error grid analysis showed the proportions of zones A to E as 96.7%, 3.2%, 0.1%, 0%, and 0% for SBP, respectively, and 72.0%, 27.9%, 0.1%, 0%, and 0% for MBP, respectively. The finger cuff missed 23.9% of epochs when SBP <90 mm Hg and 55.3% of epochs when MBP <65 mm Hg. The ordinal logistic regression analysis revealed that older age (adjusted odds ratio for decade: 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.08; P = .004) and length of time from the initiation of finger cuff inflation (adjusted odds ratio for 60 minutes: 1.40, 95% CI, 1.13-1.73; P = .002) were significant factors of being in a more dangerous zone of the error grid.

CONCLUSIONS

The error grid analysis revealed the larger clinical discrepancy between CNBP and IBP in MBP compared with that in SBP. Old age and longer finger cuff inflation time were significant factors of being in a more dangerous zone of the error grid, which could affect the hemodynamic management during surgery.

Causes of arterial hypotension during anesthetic induction with propofol investigated with perfusion index and ClearSightTM in young and elderly patients

BACKGROUND

Mechanism underlying the hypotension during anesthetic induction in elderly patients is inferred to differ from that in younger patients due to structural changes in arteries. The aim of the study was to determine if a decrease in cardiac output (CO) or systemic vascular resistance (SVR) is the main mechanism of the hypotension.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients comprising 28 healthy elderly patients aged 75-90 years (group E) and 28 healthy younger patients aged 20-40 years (group Y) were enrolled. General anesthesia was induced with propofol (1.2 mg/kg, group E; 2 mg/kg, group Y), remifentanil (0.15 µg/kg/min, group E; 0.3 µg/kg/min, group Y) and rocuronium. Primary outcome was to compare serial changes in PI of Radical-7^TM, SVR, CO and stroke volume variations (SVV) of ClearSight^TM (Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA) during the five-minute period from propofol administration until intubation.

RESULTS

The degree of increase in PI and reduction in SVR in group Y were significantly greater than those in group E (P<0.01 with repeated measure ANOVA). The degree of reduction in CO and increase in SVV were significantly larger in group E (P<0.01). All values of mean arterial blood pressure measured during the five-minute correlated negatively with PI in group Y (r=0.44, P<0.01) and positively with CO in group E (r=0.4, P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The main mechanisms of hypotension during anesthetic induction contribute to the decrease in CO in elderly and reduction of SVR in younger. PI only shows the vascular tone of a finger but can be a surrogate for SVR.

Clinical Evaluation of a High-fidelity Upper Arm Cuff to Measure Arterial Blood Pressure during Noncardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

In most patients having noncardiac surgery, blood pressure is measured with the oscillometric upper arm cuff method. Although the method is noninvasive and practical, it is known to overestimate intraarterial pressure in hypotension and to underestimate it in hypertension. A high-fidelity upper arm cuff incorporating a hydraulic sensor pad was recently developed. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether noninvasive blood pressure measurements with the new high-fidelity cuff correspond to invasive measurements with a femoral artery catheter, especially at low blood pressure.

METHODS

Simultaneous measurements of blood pressure recorded from a femoral arterial catheter and from the high-fidelity upper arm cuff were compared in 110 patients having major abdominal surgery or neurosurgery.

RESULTS

550 pairs of blood pressure measurements (5 pairs per patient) were considered for analysis. For mean arterial pressure measurements, the average bias was 0 mmHg, and the precision was 3 mmHg. The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.96 (P < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.96 to 0.97), and the percentage error was 9%. Error grid analysis showed that the proportions of mean arterial pressure measurements done with the high-fidelity cuff method were 98.4% in zone A (no risk), 1.6% in zone B (low risk) and 0% in zones C, D, and E (moderate, significant, and dangerous risk, respectively). The high-fidelity cuff method detected mean arterial pressure values less than 65 mmHg with a sensitivity of 84% (95% CI, 74 to 92%) and a specificity of 97% (95% CI, 95% to 98%). To detect changes in mean arterial pressure of more than 5 mmHg, the concordance rate between the two methods was 99.7%. Comparable accuracy and precision were observed for systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

The new high-fidelity upper arm cuff method met the current international standards in terms of accuracy and precision. It was also very accurate to track changes in blood pressure and reliably detect severe hypotension during noncardiac surgery.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE