Search

BACKGROUND Obesity and hypertension are public health priorities, with obesity considered to be a potential cause of hypertension. Accurate blood pressure (BP) determination is required and often obtained by automated oscillometric cuff devices. We sought to determine the correlation of oscillometric measurement in children, and if obesity was associated with worse correlation between methods than nonobese children. METHODS Retrospective matched case-controlled study of 100 obese (97–99th percentile) and 100 nonobese (25–70th percentile) children after cardiac surgery with simultaneous systolic, diastolic, and mean invasive and oscillometric measurements. Matching was 1:1 for age, sex, race, and Risk Adjustment for Congenital Heart Surgery-1 score. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland–Altman plots were used to determine agreement with 0.75 as threshold. RESULTS Median age was 13 years (10–15). Agreement was low for systolic (0.65 and 0.61), diastolic (0.68 and 0.61), and mean measurements (0.73 and 0.69) (obese/nonobese). Bland–Altman plots demonstrated oscillometric BP measurements underestimated systolic hypertension (oscillometric readings lower than intra-arterial). Oscillometric measurements underestimated hypotension (systolic oscillometric measurements were higher than intra-arterial). This occurred in obese and nonobese patients. Correlation of oscillometric measurements was similar for nonobese and obese patients. CONCLUSIONS In this first ever study of simultaneous BP measurement by oscillometric vs. intra-arterial in obese and nonobese children, correlation is below accepted norms. The correlation of oscillometric cuff measurements is not affected by habitus in children. There is less correlation between oscillometric measurements and intra-arterial measurements during hypertension or hypotension. Healthcare providers should be aware of the limitations of oscillometric measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Nexfin device allows for non-invasive beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring (BP). Perioperative hypotension and hypertension have been shown to be associated with poor clinical outcomes. The goal of the present study was to assess the ability of this device to decrease the duration of significant intraoperative hypo- or hypertension compared to standard BP monitoring by cuff (BP). We studied25 patients (ASA I-III) undergoing either abdominal or orthopedic surgery. BP was monitored every 5 min from the introduction of anesthesia, while BP was monitored continuously on the opposite arm. When systolic BP (SBP) decreased or increased more than 20% relative to baseline SBP, a standard BP measurement was taken to compare values. In addition, the time interval between the 20% change in SBP and the next scheduled standard SBP measurement was recorded for each event. The mean length of surgery was 3.0 ± 0.3 h. Patients presented with 11 ± 4 episodes of hypotension and 12 ± 4 episodes of hypertension during the surgery. If BP had been used, this would have resulted in 21 ± 7 min of hypotension and 20 ± 10 min of hypertension. If hemodynamic changes seen by SBP were appropriately treated, an average of 7 ± 1 min/h of hypotension time, 7 ± 2 min/h of hypertension time and 14 ± 3 min per hour of hypo- or hypertension time may have been identified. The Nexfin BP has the potential to decrease the time of hypotension and hypertension compared to conventional intermittent BP monitoring. Therefore, this device has the potential to positively impact clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cuff blood pressure data has suggested that the calcium channel antagonist nisoldipine has full twenty four hour efficacy. To test this, 24 h ambulatory intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring was performed on 18 untreated hypertensive subjects (12 men, 6 women) (cuff blood pressure >150/95 mm Hg) before and after chronic treatment with 10-20 mg oral nisoldipine taken daily at 08.00 h. Twelve patients completed the study, six being withdrawn, four because of side-effects. After baseline intra-arterial monitoring patients were started on 10 mg nisoldipine daily. Response was assessed by cuff pressures taken 24 h after dosing at fortnightly intervals, and if not controlled (<150/95 or at least 10 mm Hg reduction in diastolic BP) the dose was increased to 20 mg. All patients received at least six weeks' therapy before the second intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring. There was a slight but insignificant reduction in mean daytime heart rate of 3 beats·min. Mean significant reduction in daytime systolic and diastolic BP was 19 mm Hg and 13 mm Hg respectively but there was no significant mean night-time reduction. By comparison 8 out of 12 patients were apparently controlled more than 24 h post dose according to cuff pressures. This study suggests that this formulation of nisoldipine does not control blood pressure over a full 24-h period, and emphasises the importance of 24 h ambulatory monitoring in assessing the efficacy of once-daily antihypertensive agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]