A Pilot Study of Blood Pressure Monitoring After Cardiac Surgery Using a Wearable, Non-invasive Sensor.

Erez Kachel, Keren Constantini, Dean Nachman, Shemy Carasso, Romi Littman, Arik Eisenkraft, Yftach Gepner
Author Information
  1. Erez Kachel: Division of Cardiac Surgery, Cardiovascular Center, Padeh-Poriya Hospital, Tiberias, Israel.
  2. Keren Constantini: Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine and Sylvan Adams Sports Institute, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
  3. Dean Nachman: Institute for Research in Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
  4. Shemy Carasso: Division of Cardiac Surgery, Cardiovascular Center, Padeh-Poriya Hospital, Tiberias, Israel.
  5. Romi Littman: Biobeat Technologies Ltd., Petah Tikva, Israel.
  6. Arik Eisenkraft: Institute for Research in Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
  7. Yftach Gepner: Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine and Sylvan Adams Sports Institute, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Abstract

Continuous blood pressure (BP) measurement in intensive care units is based on arterial line (AL) transducers, sometimes associated with clinical complications. Our objective was to evaluate continuous BP measurements obtained from a non-invasive, wireless photoplethysmography (PPG)-based device using two distinct configurations (wristwatch and chest-patch monitors) compared to an AL. In this prospective evaluation study, comparison of the PPG-based devices to the AL was conducted in 10 patients immediately following cardiac surgery. Pulse rate (PR), systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded using both the AL and the PPG-based devices simultaneously for an average of 432 ± 290 min starting immediately after cardiac surgery. Bland-Altman plots and Pearson's correlations were used to assess the accuracy and degree of agreement between techniques. A total of ~4,000 data points were included in the final analysis. AL measurements for PR, SBP, DBP and MAP were significantly ( < 0.001) and strongly correlated with both the wristwatch ( = 0.99, = 0.94, = 0.93 and = 0.96, respectively) and the chest-patch ( = 0.99, = 0.95, = 0.93 and = 0.95, respectively) monitors. Both configurations showed a marginal bias of <1 mmHg for BP measurements and <1 beat/min for PR [95% limits of agreement -3,3 beat/min; BP measurements: (-6)-(-10), 6-10 mmHg] compared to AL measurements. The PPG-based devices offer a high level of accuracy for cardiac-related parameters compared to an AL in post-cardiac surgery patients. Such devices could provide advanced monitoring capabilities in a variety of clinical settings, including immediate post-operative and intensive care unit settings. www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03603860.

Keywords

Associated Data

ClinicalTrials.gov | NCT03603860

References

  1. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Mar 11;7(3):e10828 [PMID: 30855232]
  2. Crit Care. 2002 Jun;6(3):199-204 [PMID: 12133178]
  3. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2008;4(3):615-27 [PMID: 18827911]
  4. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2019 Sep - Oct;31:101401 [PMID: 30951903]
  5. Anesth Analg. 2013 Jan;116(1):94-100 [PMID: 23223109]
  6. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2006 Jul;21(4):279-87 [PMID: 16755195]
  7. Sci Rep. 2020 Sep 30;10(1):16116 [PMID: 32999400]
  8. Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 19;10(1):17684 [PMID: 33077774]
  9. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Jul 05;5(7):e91 [PMID: 28679490]
  10. Curr Probl Surg. 1988 Feb;25(2):69-145 [PMID: 3280251]
  11. JAMA. 2017 Oct 10;318(14):1346-1357 [PMID: 28973220]
  12. Blood Press Monit. 2010 Feb;15(1):23-38 [PMID: 20110786]
  13. Biomed Eng Online. 2017 Feb 6;16(1):23 [PMID: 28166774]
  14. J Clin Monit Comput. 2018 Oct;32(5):817-823 [PMID: 29204771]
  15. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Jul 25;5(7):e97 [PMID: 28743682]
  16. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017 Nov 1;12(10):1324-1328 [PMID: 28290720]
  17. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2015 Jun;21(3):232-9 [PMID: 25922896]
  18. Arch Dermatol. 1988 Jun;124(6):869-71 [PMID: 3377516]
  19. Br J Anaesth. 2011 Apr;106(4):482-6 [PMID: 21205627]
  20. Ann Transl Med. 2019 Sep;7(17):421 [PMID: 31660320]
  21. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2009 Jun;11(3):173-7 [PMID: 19442325]
  22. Anesthesiology. 2017 Jan;126(1):16-27 [PMID: 27775997]
  23. Hypertension. 2019 May;73(5):e35-e66 [PMID: 30827125]
  24. Anesthesiology. 2019 Apr;130(4):550-559 [PMID: 30875354]
  25. J Med Eng Technol. 2008 Nov-Dec;32(6):479-84 [PMID: 18663635]
  26. Int J Biosens Bioelectron. 2018;4(4):195-202 [PMID: 30906922]
  27. J Clin Med. 2020 Dec 22;10(1): [PMID: 33375211]
  28. Br J Anaesth. 2020 Aug;125(2):113-115 [PMID: 32439073]
  29. J Telemed Telecare. 2020 Jun;26(5):309-313 [PMID: 32196391]
  30. Anesthesiology. 2018 Feb;128(2):317-327 [PMID: 29189290]
  31. World J Methodol. 2018 Jun 28;8(1):1-8 [PMID: 29988909]
  32. Anesthesiology. 2020 Mar;132(3):407-410 [PMID: 31929331]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.00=ALBPpressuremeasurementsdevicessurgeryarterialcomparedPPG-basedcardiacPRbloodintensivecareclinicalnon-invasiveusingconfigurationswristwatchchest-patchmonitorspatientsimmediatelySBPDBPmeanMAPaccuracyagreement9993respectively95<1beat/minsettingsContinuousmeasurementunitsbasedlinetransducerssometimesassociatedcomplicationsobjectiveevaluatecontinuousobtainedwirelessphotoplethysmographyPPG-baseddevicetwodistinctprospectiveevaluationstudycomparisonconducted10followingPulseratesystolicdiastolicrecordedsimultaneouslyaverage432±290minstartingBland-AltmanplotsPearson'scorrelationsusedassessdegreetechniquestotal~4000datapointsincludedfinalanalysissignificantly<001stronglycorrelated9496showedmarginalbiasmmHg[95%limits-33measurements:-6--106-10mmHg]offerhighlevelcardiac-relatedparameterspost-cardiacprovideadvancedmonitoringcapabilitiesvarietyincludingimmediatepost-operativeunitwwwclinicaltrialsgovNCT03603860PilotStudyBloodPressureMonitoringCardiacSurgeryUsingWearableNon-invasiveSensorsensorwearable

Similar Articles

Cited By