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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)439-446
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
Volume32
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018

Cite this

@article{27f71fc678f2442cb631f510901e3786,
title = "Comparing volume-clamp method and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation admitted to the intensive or medium care unit",
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{\circledR}, 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.",
keywords = "Atrial fibrillation, Blood pressure, Noninvasive measurement, Validation, Volume clamp method",
author = "Berkelmans, {G. F. N.} and S. Kuipers and Westerhof, {B. E.} and {Spoelstra-de Man}, {A. M. E.} and Smulders, {Y. M.}",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1007/s10877-017-0044-9",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "439--446",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing",
issn = "1387-1307",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing volume-clamp method and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation admitted to the intensive or medium care unit

AU - Berkelmans, G. F. N.

AU - Kuipers, S.

AU - Westerhof, B. E.

AU - Spoelstra-de Man, A. M. E.

AU - Smulders, Y. M.

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Atrial fibrillation

KW - Blood pressure

KW - Noninvasive measurement

KW - Validation

KW - Volume clamp method

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85022051192&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10877-017-0044-9

DO - 10.1007/s10877-017-0044-9

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 439

EP - 446

JO - Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

JF - Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

SN - 1387-1307

IS - 3

ER -