The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 5 of 33
Back to Result List

The use of non-invasive continuous blood pressure measuring (ClearSight\(^®\)) during central neuraxial anaesthesia for caesarean section — a retrospective validation study

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-286042
  • Background: The close monitoring of blood pressure during a caesarean section performed under central neuraxial anaesthesia should be the standard of safe anaesthesia. As classical oscillometric and invasive blood pressure measuring have intrinsic disadvantages, we investigated a novel, non-invasive technique for continuous blood pressure measuring. Methods: In this monocentric, retrospective data analysis, the reliability of continuous non-invasive blood pressure measuring using ClearSight\(^®\) (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation) is validatedBackground: The close monitoring of blood pressure during a caesarean section performed under central neuraxial anaesthesia should be the standard of safe anaesthesia. As classical oscillometric and invasive blood pressure measuring have intrinsic disadvantages, we investigated a novel, non-invasive technique for continuous blood pressure measuring. Methods: In this monocentric, retrospective data analysis, the reliability of continuous non-invasive blood pressure measuring using ClearSight\(^®\) (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation) is validated in 31 women undergoing central neuraxial anaesthesia for caesarean section. In addition, patients and professionals evaluated ClearSight\(^®\) through questioning. Results: 139 measurements from 11 patients were included in the final analysis. Employing Bland–Altman analyses, we identified a bias of −10.8 mmHg for systolic, of −0.45 mmHg for diastolic and of +0.68 mmHg for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Pooling all paired measurements resulted in a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.7 for systolic, of 0.67 for diastolic and of 0.75 for mean arterial blood pressure. Compensating the interindividual differences in linear regressions of the paired measurements provided improved correlation coefficients of 0.73 for systolic, of 0.9 for diastolic and of 0.89 for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Discussion: Diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure are within an acceptable range of deviation from the reference method, according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) in the patient collective under study. Both patients and professionals prefer ClearSight\(^®\) to oscillometric blood pressure measurement in regard of comfort and handling.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: Philipp Helmer, Daniel Helf, Michael Sammeth, Bernd Winkler, Sebastian Hottenrott, Patrick MeybohmORCiD, Peter Kranke
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-286042
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Medizinische Fakultät / Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004)
Language:English
Parent Title (English):Journal of Clinical Medicine
ISSN:2077-0383
Year of Completion:2022
Volume:11
Issue:15
Article Number:4498
Source:Journal of Clinical Medicine (2022) 11:15, 4498. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11154498
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11154498
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Tag:Bland–Altman; ClearSight\(^®\); Fisher Z-score transformation; Pearson correlation coefficient; epidural anaesthesia; supine hypotensive syndrome; volume clamp
Release Date:2023/08/21
Date of first Publication:2022/08/02
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung 4.0 International