Anast Nicholas, Olejniczak Megan, Ingrande Jerry, Brock-Utne John
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Anesthesiology and Perioperative Care Service, Palo Alto Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Can J Anaesth. 2016 Mar;63(3):298-306. doi: 10.1007/s12630-015-0509-6. Epub 2015 Oct 16.
Obesity presents many challenges to the anesthesiologist, including poorly fitting blood pressure (BP) cuffs due to the conical shape of the upper arm. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of noninvasive BP readings, obtained from a noninvasive BP cuff using various cuff locations and wrapping techniques, compared with invasive intra-arterial BP readings.
Thirty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III obese (body mass index > 30 kg·m(-2)) individuals undergoing non-cardiac surgery were enrolled in this observational study. Serial oscillometric noninvasive BP (NIBP) measurements were taken in the patients' forearm and upper arm with two different wrapping formations (one following the contour of the upper arm, the other keeping cuff edges parallel). These NIBP measurements were compared with invasive arterial blood pressure (ABP) measurements taken from the ipsilateral radial artery. The precision and bias of the NIBP and ABP measurements were determined using Bland-Altman analysis. Analysis of variance and Welch's t test were used to determine between-group differences in bias.
There was poor agreement between the ABP measurements and all types of NIBP measurements. Each of our study participants had a least one NIBP parameter (mean arterial pressure, systolic BP, or diastolic BP) that was > 10 mmHg different than the corresponding ABP parameter. Upper arm BP measurements showed a statistically insignificant trend toward underestimating ABP. For all cuff positions and wrapping techniques, systolic BP offered the best agreement between NIBP and ABP measurements.
All the forms of NIBP cuff orientation studied had unacceptable precision and bias compared with invasive ABP measurements. When patient and/or surgical conditions necessitate accurate BP monitoring, direct arterial measurement should be considered over NIBP measurements in obese patients.
肥胖给麻醉医生带来诸多挑战,包括由于上臂呈圆锥形导致血压袖带贴合不佳。本研究的目的是确定使用各种袖带位置和缠绕技术从无创血压袖带获得的无创血压读数与有创动脉血压读数相比的准确性。
30名美国麻醉医师协会身体状况为I - III级的肥胖(体重指数>30 kg·m⁻²)且接受非心脏手术的患者纳入本观察性研究。使用两种不同的缠绕方式(一种沿着上臂轮廓,另一种保持袖带边缘平行)在患者的前臂和上臂进行连续示波无创血压(NIBP)测量。将这些NIBP测量值与从同侧桡动脉获取的有创动脉血压(ABP)测量值进行比较。使用Bland - Altman分析确定NIBP和ABP测量的精密度和偏差。采用方差分析和Welch t检验确定组间偏差差异。
ABP测量值与所有类型的NIBP测量值之间的一致性较差。我们的每个研究参与者至少有一个NIBP参数(平均动脉压、收缩压或舒张压)与相应的ABP参数相差>10 mmHg。上臂血压测量显示出低估ABP的统计学上无显著意义的趋势。对于所有袖带位置和缠绕技术,收缩压在NIBP和ABP测量之间的一致性最佳。
与有创ABP测量相比,所研究的所有形式的NIBP袖带方向的精密度和偏差均不可接受。当患者和/或手术情况需要精确的血压监测时,肥胖患者应考虑直接动脉测量而非NIBP测量。