Evaluation of high-definition and conventional oscillometric blood pressure measurement in anaesthetised dogs using ACVIM guidelines

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate high‐definition and conventional oscillometry in comparison with direct blood pressure measurements in anaesthetised dogs. Methods: Eight simultaneous readings for systolic, diastolic and mean pressure were obtained directly and with each of two devices in nine anaesthetised dogs. Measurement procedure and validation were based on the 2007 ACVIM guidelines. Results: Sixty‐three simultaneous readings were evaluated for each device and direct measurements. The mean differences (bias) to direct values were within 10 mmHg for both devices although bias for systolic and diastolic blood pressures was higher for Memodiagnostic. The standard deviations of differences (precision) were within 15 mmHg for Dinamap but exceeded for Memodiagnostic. Correlation coefficients were higher for Dinamap than Memodiagnostic but both failed to reach a correlation of 0·9. Over 50% of values lay within 10 mmHg of direct measures for both devices, but this percentage was greater for Dinamap than Memodiagnostic. Over 80% of values lay within 20 mmHg of direct measures for Dinamap but not for Memodiagnostic. Clinical Significance: Both devices failed to meet ACVIM guideline validation. However, Dinamap only failed with regards to correlation. Memodiagnostic failed on several requirements, and based on poor correlation, accuracy and precision, this device cannot be currently recommended for dogs under anaesthesia.

Comparison of high definition oscillometric and Doppler ultrasound devices with invasive blood pressure in anaesthetized dogs

“…Of the various HDO pressure measurements, MAP exhibited the least method‐dependent bias and most closely paralleled telemetric blood pressure assessment. In the present study, the best agreement between HDO and invasive blood pressure measurement techniques was observed for MAP which is in agreement with the results of Wernick et al. (2010).…”

“…2010). The repeatability of measurements, showing consistency in readings as reported by Wernick et al. (2010), was confirmed in the present study.…”

“…(2010), was confirmed in the present study. The HDO failed to perform readings in 6.4% of cases which contrasts with the results presented by Wernick et al. (2010) where readings were obtained at all measurements.…”

Non-invasive blood pressure measurement in ferrets ( Mustela putorius furo ) using high definition oscillometry

“…These findings are similar to those found in dogs, cats and horses (Wernick et al, 2010;Martel et al, 2013;Rysnik et al, 2013;Seliškar et al, 2013;Tünsmeyer et al, 2015). This discrepancy between DABP and NIBP measurement might be explained in part by the inaccuracy of the device (Wernick et al, 2010), but might also be the result of the technique used to measure NIBP. With the HDO technique, arterial wall oscillations rather than actual BP is measured.…”

“…HDO has been evaluated previously in dogs, cats, horses, cheetahs and monkeys (Schmelting et al, 2009;Meyer et al, 2010;Petri9 c et al, 2010;Wernick et al, 2010;Martel et al, 2013;Rysnik et al, 2013;Seliškar et al, 2013;Mietsch and Einspanier, 2015;Sant Cassia et al, 2015;Tünsmeyer et al, 2015), but not ferrets.…”