Suppr超能文献

比较入住重症监护病房或中等护理病房的房颤患者的容积钳夹法与动脉内血压测量。

Comparing volume-clamp method and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation admitted to the intensive or medium care unit.

作者信息

Berkelmans G F N, Kuipers S, Westerhof B E, Spoelstra-de Man A M E, Smulders Y M

机构信息

Department of Vascular Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Department of Internal Medicine, Zaans Medical Center, Zaandam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Clin Monit Comput. 2018 Jun;32(3):439-446. doi: 10.1007/s10877-017-0044-9. Epub 2017 Jul 7.

Abstract

International guidelines highlight the importance of blood pressure (BP) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, BP measurement in AF is complicated by beat-to-beat fluctuation. Automated BP measurement devices are not validated for patients with AF and no consensus exists on how to measure BP in AF manually. Beat-to-beat BP measurement using the volume-clamp method (VCM) could represent a non-invasive method to accurately assess BP, but has not been validated in AF. 31 admitted patients with sustained AF and 10 control patients with sinus rhythm underwent simultaneous intra-arterial and non-invasive BP measurement using a VCM monitor (Nexfin, BMEYE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Patients with compromised peripheral perfusion, high doses of vasopressor drugs or peripheral edema were excluded. Differences in systolic, diastolic and mean BP of 5 (standard deviation; SD 8) mmHg (accuracy and precision) between both methods were considered acceptable. Additionally, the magnitude of beat-to-beat fluctuations in systolic BP of both methods was compared. In AF, the differences between noninvasive and invasive BP were -4 (SD 12), +1 (SD 7) and 0 (SD 8) mmHg for systolic, diastolic and mean BP respectively. Absolute differences in beat-to-beat BP fluctuations were 1.5 (IQR 0.8-3.8) mmHg. Accuracy of VCM in AF was similar to sinus rhythm. In conclusion, in patients with AF, accurate and precise measurement of non-invasive beat-to-beat BP measurement using the VCM is possible, the one exception being the precision of systolic BP. Beat-to-beat variability can be accurately reproduced.

摘要

国际指南强调了血压(BP)在心房颤动(AF)患者中的重要性。然而,房颤患者的血压测量因逐搏波动而变得复杂。自动血压测量设备尚未在房颤患者中得到验证,对于如何手动测量房颤患者的血压也没有达成共识。使用容积钳法(VCM)进行逐搏血压测量可能是一种准确评估血压的非侵入性方法,但尚未在房颤患者中得到验证。31例持续性房颤住院患者和10例窦性心律对照患者使用VCM监测仪(Nexfin,BMEYE,荷兰阿姆斯特丹)同时进行有创和无创血压测量。排除外周灌注受损、高剂量血管升压药或外周水肿的患者。两种方法之间收缩压、舒张压和平均血压相差5(标准差;SD 8)mmHg(准确性和精密度)被认为是可以接受的。此外,还比较了两种方法收缩压逐搏波动的幅度。在房颤患者中,无创血压与有创血压的差异分别为收缩压-4(SD 12)、舒张压+1(SD 7)和平均血压0(SD 8)mmHg。逐搏血压波动的绝对差异为1.5(四分位间距0.8-3.8)mmHg。房颤患者中VCM的准确性与窦性心律相似。总之,对于房颤患者,使用VCM进行准确、精确的无创逐搏血压测量是可行的,唯一的例外是收缩压的精密度。逐搏变异性可以准确再现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/33c9/5943389/9bfee7b270fb/10877_2017_44_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验