Dataset Information

Estimation of central arterial pressure from the radial artery in patients undergoing invasive neuroradiological procedures.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUNDS:Central arterial pressure can be derived from analysis of the peripheral artery waveform. The aim of this study was to compare central arterial pressures measured from an intra-aortic catheter with peripheral radial arterial pressures and with central arterial pressures estimated from the peripheral pressure wave using a pressure recording analytical method (PRAM). METHODS:We studied 21 patients undergoing digital subtraction cerebral angiography under local or general anesthesia and equipped with a radial arterial catheter. A second catheter was placed in the ascending aorta for central pressure wave acquisition. Central (AO) and peripheral (RA) arterial waveforms were recorded simultaneously by PRAM for 90-180 s. During an off-line analysis, AO pressures were reconstructed (AOrec) from the RA trace using a mathematical model obtained by multi-linear regression analysis. The AOrec values obtained by PRAM were compared with the true central pressure value obtained from the catheter placed in the ascending aorta. RESULTS:Systolic, diastolic and mean pressures ranged from 79 to 180 mmHg, 47 to 102 mmHg, and 58 to 128 mmHg, respectively, for AO, and 83 to 174 mmHg, 47 to 107 mmHg, and 60 to 129 mmHg, respectively, for RA. The correlation coefficients between AO and RA were 0.86 (p < 0.01), 0.83 (p < 0.01) and 0.86 (p < 0.01) for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively, and the mean differences - 0.3 mmHg, 2.4 mmHg and 1.5 mmHg. The correlation coefficients between AO and AOrec were 0.92 (p < 0.001), 0.87 (p < 0.001) and 0.92 (p < 0.001), for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively, and the mean differences 0.01 mmHg, 1.8 mmHg and 1.2 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS:PRAM can provide reliable estimates of central arterial pressure.

SUBMITTER: Scolletta S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6727486 | biostudies-other | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Estimation of central arterial pressure from the radial artery in patients undergoing invasive neuroradiological procedures.

Scolletta Sabino S Herpain Antoine A Romano Salvatore Mario SM Taccone Fabio Silvio FS Donadello Katia K Lubicz Boris B Franchi Federico F Kaefer Keitiane Michele KM Polati Enrico E Vincent Jean-Louis JL De Backer Daniel D

BMC anesthesiology 20190904 1

<h4>Backgrounds</h4>Central arterial pressure can be derived from analysis of the peripheral artery waveform. The aim of this study was to compare central arterial pressures measured from an intra-aortic catheter with peripheral radial arterial pressures and with central arterial pressures estimated from the peripheral pressure wave using a pressure recording analytical method (PRAM).<h4>Methods</h4>We studied 21 patients undergoing digital subtraction cerebral angiography under local or general ...[more]

PMID: 31484508

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGlomerular hyperfiltration resulting from an elevated intraglomerular pressure (Pglom) is an important cause of CKD, but there is no feasible method to directly assess Pglom in humans. We developed a model to estimate Pglom in patients from combined renal arterial pressure and flow measurements.MethodsWe performed hemodynamic measurements in 34 patients undergoing renal or cardiac angiography under baseline conditions and during hyperemia induced by intrarenal dopamine infusion (30 μg/kg). For each participant during baseline and hyperemia, we fitted an adapted three-element Windkessel model that consisted of characteristic impedance, compliance, afferent resistance, and Pglom.ResultsWe successfully analyzed data from 28 (82%) patients. Median age was 58 years (IQR, 52-65), median eGFR was 95 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (IQR, 74-100) using the CKD-EPI formula, 30% had microalbuminuria, and 32% had diabetes. The model showed a mean Pglom of 48.0 mm Hg (SD=10.1) at baseline. Under hyperemia, flow increased by 88% (95% CI, 68% to 111%). This resulted in a 165% (95% CI, 79% to 294%) increase in afferent compliance and a 13.1-mm Hg (95% CI, 10.0 to 16.3) decrease in Pglom. In multiple linear regression analysis, diabetes (coefficient, 10.1; 95% CI, 5.1 to 15.1), BMI (0.99 per kg/m2; 95% CI, 0.38 to 1.59), and renal perfusion pressure (0.42 per mm Hg; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.59) were significantly positively associated with baseline Pglom.ConclusionsWe constructed a model on the basis of proximal renal arterial pressure and flow velocity measurements that provides an overall estimate of glomerular pressure and afferent and efferent resistance in humans. The model provides a novel research technique to evaluate the hemodynamics of CKD on the basis of direct pressure and flow measurements.Clinical trial registry name and registration numberFunctional HEmodynamics in patients with and without Renal Artery stenosis (HERA), NL40795.018.12 at the Dutch national trial registry (toetsingonline.nl).

Project description:It is unclear whether or not ultrasound-guided cannulation (UGC) of the femoral artery is superior to the standard approach (SA) in reducing vascular complications and improving access success. We sought to compare procedural and clinical outcomes of femoral UGC versus SA in patients undergoing percutaneous cardiovascular intervention (PCvI). We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and web sources for randomized trials comparing UGC versus SA. We estimated risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Primary efficacy endpoint was the success rate at the first attempt, while secondary efficacy endpoints were access time and number of attempts. Primary safety endpoints were the rates of vascular complications, while secondary endpoints were major bleeding, as well as access site hematoma, venepuncture, pseudoaneurysms and retroperitoneal hematoma. This meta-analysis has been registered on Centre for Open Science (OSF) (osf.io/fy82e). Seven trials were included, randomizing 3180 patients to UGC (n = 1564) or SA (n = 1616). Efficacy between UGC and SA was the main metric assessed in most of the trials, in which one third of the enrolled patients underwent interventional procedures. The success rate of the first attempt was significantly higher with UGC compared to SA, (82.0% vs. 58.7%; RR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.57; p < 0.0001; I2 = 88%). Time to access and number of attempts were significantly reduced with UGC compared to SA (SMD: -0.19; 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.10; p < 0.0001; I2 = 22%) and (SMD: -0.40; 95% CI: -0.58 to -0.21; p < 0.0001; I2 = 82%), respectively. Compared with SA, use of UGC was associated with a significant reduction in vascular complications (1.3% vs. 3.0%; RR: 0.48; CI 95%: 0.25 to 0.91; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%) and access-site hematoma (1.2% vs. 3.3%; RR: 0.41; CI 95%: 0.20 to 0.83; p = 0.01; I2 = 27%), but there were non-significant differences in major bleeding (0.7% vs. 1.4%; RR: 0.57; CI 95%: 0.24 to 1.32; p = 0.19; I2 = 0%). Rates of venepuncture were lower with UGC (3.6% vs. 12.1%; RR: 0.32; CI 95%: 0.20 to 0.52; p < 0.00001; I2 = 55%). This study, which included all available data to date, demonstrated that, compared to a standard approach, ultrasound-guided cannulation of the femoral artery is associated with lower access-related complications and higher efficacy rates. These results could be of great clinical relevance especially in the femoral cannulation of high risk patients.

Project description:BackgroundOscillometric, non-invasive blood pressure measurement (NIBP) is the first choice of blood pressure monitoring in the majority of low and moderate risk surgeries. In patients with morbid obesity, however, it is subject to several limitations. The aim was to compare arterial pressure monitoring by NIBP and a non-invasive finger-cuff technology (Nexfin®) with the gold-standard invasive arterial pressure (IAP).MethodsIn this secondary analysis of a prospective observational, single centre cohort study, systolic (SAP), diastolic (DAP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured at 16 defined perioperative time points including posture changes, fluid bolus administration and pneumoperitoneum (PP) in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Absolute arterial pressures by NIBP, Nexfin® and IAP were compared using correlation and Bland Altman analyses. Interchangeability was defined by a mean difference ≤ 5 mmHg (SD ≤8 mmHg). Percentage error (PE) was calculated as an additional statistical estimate. For hemodynamic trending, concordance rates were analysed according to the Critchley criterion.ResultsSixty patients (mean body mass index of 49.2 kg/m2) were enrolled and data from 56 finally analysed. Pooled blood pressure values of all time points showed a significant positive correlation for both NIPB and Nexfin® versus IAP. Pooled PE for NIBP versus IAP was 37% (SAP), 35% (DAP) and 30% (MAP), for Nexfin versus IAP 23% (SAP), 26% (DAP) and 22% (MAP). Correlation of MAP was best and PE lowest before induction of anesthesia for NIBP versus IAP (r = 0.72; PE 24%) and after intraoperative fluid bolus administration for Nexfin® versus IAP (r = 0.88; PE: 17.2%). Concordance of MAP trending was 90% (SAP 85%, DAP 89%) for NIBP and 91% (SAP 90%, DAP 86%) for Nexfin®. MAP trending was best during intraoperative ATP positioning for NIBP (97%) and at induction of anesthesia for Nexfin® (97%).ConclusionAs compared with IAP, interchangeability of absolute pressure values could neither be shown for NIBP nor Nexfin®, however, NIBP showed poorer overall correlation and precision. Overall trending ability was generally high with Nexfin® surpassing NIBP. Nexfin® may likely render individualized decision-making in the management of different hemodynamic stresses during laparoscopic bariatric surgery, particularly where NIBP cannot be reliably established.Trial registrationThe non-interventional, observational study was registered retrospectively at ( NCT03184285 ) on June 12, 2017.

Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery bypass grafting using the radial artery has, since the 1990s, gone through a revival. Observational studies have indicated better long-term patency when using radial arteries. Therefore, radial artery might be preferred especially in younger patients where long time patency is important. During the last 10 years different endoscopic techniques to harvest the radial artery have evolved. Endoscopic radial artery harvest only requires a small incision near the wrist in contrast to open harvest, which requires an incision from the elbow to the wrist. However, it is unknown whether the endoscopic technique results in fewer complications or a graft patency comparable to open harvest. When the radial artery has been harvested, there are two ways to use the radial artery as a graft. One way is sewing it onto the aorta and another is sewing it onto the mammary artery. It is unknown which technique is the superior revascularisation technique.Methods/designThe NEO Trial is a randomised clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. We plan to randomise 300 participants into four intervention groups: (1) mammario-radial endoscopic group; (2) aorto-radial endoscopic group; (3) mammario-radial open surgery group; and (4) aorto-radial open surgery group.The hand function will be assessed by a questionnaire, a clinical examination, the change in cutaneous sensibility, and the measurement of both sensory and motor nerve conduction velocity at 3 months postoperatively. All the postoperative complications will be registered, and we will evaluate muscular function, scar appearance, vascular supply to the hand, and the graft patency including the patency of the central radial artery anastomosis. A patency evaluation by multi-slice computer tomography will be done at one year postoperatively.We expect the nerve conduction studies and the standardised neurological examinations to be able to discriminate differences in hand function comparing endoscopic to open harvest of the radial artery. The trial also aims to show if there is any patency difference between mammario-radial compared to aorto-radial revascularisation techniques but this objective is exploratory.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01848886.Danish Ethics committee number: H-3-2012-116.Danish Data Protection Agency: 2007-58-0015/jr.n:30-0838.

Dataset Information

Estimation of central arterial pressure from the radial artery in patients undergoing invasive neuroradiological procedures.

Publications

Estimation of central arterial pressure from the radial artery in patients undergoing invasive neuroradiological procedures.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets