Ypsilantis P, Didilis V N, Politou M, Bougioukas I, Bougioukas G, Simopoulos C
Laboratory of Experimental Surgery, Medical School, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece.
Res Vet Sci. 2005 Jun;78(3):269-75. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2004.08.003.
The aim of this project was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of direct, using the central ear artery (CEA), and oscillometric, using limb-cuffs, methods of arterial blood pressure (AP) measurement in the anesthetized rabbit.
New Zealand rabbits were anesthetized using a xylazine-ketamine-isoflurane protocol. Using the abdominal aorta (ABA) as direct "gold standard" for AP measurements, ABA pressure readings, via femoral artery catheterization, were compared with those made simultaneously from the ascending aorta after median sternotomy. Thereafter, direct CEA as well as forelimb-(FL) and hindlimb-(HL) cuff oscillometric readings were compared with those made simultaneously from ABA.
The blood pressure in the ABA correlated with that from ascending aorta. Furthermore, CEA correlated with the ABA readings. Nevertheless, at high pressures, their divergence from "true" pressure tended to increase. Oscillometric readings at the FL site correlated well with "true" pressure while those at the HL site did not. Their divergence tended to increase at high pressures when using the FL site, while it varied when using the HL site. The accuracy of measurements was moderate for the FL site while poor for the HL site.
Our results suggest that the CEA can be readily used with high reliability and accuracy for direct AP measurements in the anesthetized rabbit. On the other hand, the FL-cuff oscillometric method should only be used for the evaluation of AP at low and normal pressure ranges.
本项目的目的是评估在麻醉兔中，使用中耳动脉（CEA）的直接测量法和使用肢体袖带的示波法测量动脉血压（AP）的可靠性和准确性。
采用赛拉嗪-氯胺酮-异氟烷方案对新西兰兔进行麻醉。以腹主动脉（ABA）作为AP测量的直接“金标准”，通过股动脉插管获得的ABA压力读数与正中胸骨切开术后从升主动脉同时获取的读数进行比较。此后，将直接CEA测量值以及前肢（FL）和后肢（HL）袖带示波测量值与同时从ABA获得的测量值进行比较。
ABA中的血压与升主动脉中的血压相关。此外，CEA与ABA读数相关。然而，在高压时，它们与“真实”压力的差异往往会增加。FL部位的示波读数与“真实”压力相关性良好，而HL部位的则不然。使用FL部位时，其差异在高压时往往会增加，而使用HL部位时差异则有所不同。FL部位测量的准确性中等，而HL部位较差。
我们的结果表明，CEA可很容易地以高可靠性和准确性用于麻醉兔的直接AP测量。另一方面，FL袖带示波法仅应用于评估低压力和正常压力范围内的AP。
