{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0377055756117128, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016044925792218213, 'mean_word_length': 5.722371967654986, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Intraoperative Blood Pressure Monitoring in Obese Patients.

BACKGROUND
The optimal method for blood pressure monitoring in obese surgical patients remains unknown. Arterial catheters can cause potential complications, and noninvasive oscillometry provides only intermittent values. Finger cuff methods allow continuous noninvasive monitoring. The authors tested the hypothesis that the agreement between finger cuff and intraarterial measurements is better than the agreement between oscillometric and intraarterial measurements.


METHODS
This prospective study compared intraarterial (reference method), finger cuff, and oscillometric (upper arm, forearm, and lower leg) blood pressure measurements in 90 obese patients having bariatric surgery using Bland-Altman analysis, four-quadrant plot and concordance analysis (to assess the ability of monitoring methods to follow blood pressure changes), and error grid analysis (to describe the clinical relevance of measurement differences).


RESULTS
The difference (mean ± SD) between finger cuff and intraarterial measurements was -1 mmHg (± 11 mmHg) for mean arterial pressure, -7 mmHg (± 14 mmHg) for systolic blood pressure, and 0 mmHg (± 11 mmHg) for diastolic blood pressure. Concordance between changes in finger cuff and intraarterial measurements was 88% (mean arterial pressure), 85% (systolic blood pressure), and 81% (diastolic blood pressure). In error grid analysis comparing finger cuff and intraarterial measurements, the proportions of measurements in risk zones A to E were 77.1%, 21.6%, 0.9%, 0.4%, and 0.0% for mean arterial pressure, respectively, and 89.5%, 9.8%, 0.2%, 0.4%, and 0.2%, respectively, for systolic blood pressure. For mean arterial pressure and diastolic blood pressure, absolute agreement and trending agreement between finger cuff and intraarterial measurements were better than between oscillometric (at each of the three measurement sites) and intraarterial measurements. Forearm performed better than upper arm and lower leg monitoring with regard to absolute agreement and trending agreement with intraarterial monitoring.


CONCLUSIONS
The agreement between finger cuff and intraarterial measurements was better than the agreement between oscillometric and intraarterial measurements for mean arterial pressure and diastolic blood pressure in obese patients during surgery. Forearm oscillometry exhibits better measurement performance than upper arm or lower leg oscillometry.


EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE