Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT06518980

Prospective Validation of Intraoperative Blood Pressure Monitors

This observational study aims to identify the incidence and importance of discrepancies between measurements of intraoperative invasive and noninvasive blood pressure monitoring in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgeries under general anesthesia . The main questions it aims to answer are :

* The importance of the differences, in mmHg, between the non-invasive and invasive blood pressure measurements (NIBP-IBP) on systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure. * Identify the predictive factors associated with these differences.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital - CIUSSS de l'Est de l'Île de Montréal

Montreal East, Quebec, H1T2M4, Canada

Location contact

Pascal Laferrière-Langlois, MD, FRQS

CONTACT

[email protected]

+1-819-432-5847

Pascal Laferrière-Langlois, MD, FRQS

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

About this study

The monitoring of arterial blood pressure, invasively or noninvasively, is a requirement for perioperative hemodynamic and anesthesia management to optimize the administration of fluids and vasopressors. Numerous trials have highlighted the consequences of intraoperative blood pressure variability regarding the risk of serious complications and postoperative mortality associated with organ ischemia, and bleeding. Precisely, intraoperative hypotension (MAP <65 mm Hg) has been associated with cardiac complications as well as acute kidney injury. While no optimal intraoperative blood pressure targets has been established to minimize perioperative complications, a recent comprehensive literature review established recommended mean arterial pressure (MAP), and blood pressure (BP) targets within 100% to 120% of BP baseline with MAP ≥60 mm Hg if the patient presented low baseline (systolic BP <90 mm Hg or diastolic BP <50 mm Hg), and MAP within 90% to 110% BP baseline and ≈65 to 95 mm Hg for normal baseline (systolic BP 90-129 mm Hg and diastolic BP 50-79 mm Hg) patients.

Invasive blood pressure monitoring by arterial catheterization is the gold standard in intraoperative hemodynamic management. While providing continuous blood pressure readings allowing for dynamic and constant monitoring, clinically relevant transducer inaccuracies have been documented, present in up to 30% of patients. Within patients of the same study, comparison of invasive and noninvasive blood pressure demonstrated considerable overestimation of systolic blood pressure and underestimation of diastolic blood pressure.

Oscillometric blood pressure monitoring is noninvasive, quick, and effortless.Despite its convenience, the oscillometric monitoring of blood pressure does not allow for continuous blood pressure measurement, possibly delaying or missing the recognition of hypotensive episodes. Moreover, oscillometric devices can tend to inaccurately measure blood pressure in comparison to invasive monitoring methods. In intraoperative and critical care settings, studies have shown oscillometric devices' tendencies to overestimate low blood pressure, failing to accurately detect hypotensive episodes, thus demonstrating the superiority of invasive monitoring methods.

The discrepancies between invasive and noninvasive methods of blood pressure monitoring have been described in prior studies. It has been determined that noninvasive blood pressure tended to be greater than invasive blood pressure in 56.1% of systolic measurements, and 67.3% of diastolic measurements for the same patient. Furthermore, noninvasive blood pressure readings tend to overestimate mean arterial pressure for low blood pressure values, and to underestimate mean arterial pressure for high blood pressure values.

Considering the consequences associated with even short intraoperative hypotensive episodes, the discrepancies between noninvasive and invasive blood pressure monitoring are not negligible. Currently, little is known about the relation between these discrepancies and contextual elements linked to the patient or the surgery.

Therefore, this prospective observational trial aims to identify the incidence of gradients between intraoperative noninvasive and invasive blood pressure monitoring and extract key relationships between the occurrence of these gradients and the patient's comorbidity profile, the monitor's parameters and artifacts, and the perioperative chronology.

Study duration: 12 months

Study Center: Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Integrated University Health and Social Services Centre (CIUSSS) de l'Est de l'Ile de Montreal (CEMTL), University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Adverse Events: there is very little risk involved with participation in this study, side effects that may be associated with the use of intra-radial canula for invasive blood pressure measurement.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Fully consented, adult patients above 18 years old;
  • Undergoing surgery of duration time expected at least 60 minutes using general anesthesia;
  • Supine positioning during the surgery;
  • Surgery requiring an arterial line;
  • Both arms available for instrumentation during the surgery.

Exclusion criteria

  • Atrial fibrillation, multifocal atrial tachycardia, or any other irregular hear rythm;
  • Gradient of mean arterial pressure between the two arms greater than 5 mm Hg, as measured during the recruitment process.

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

  1. Difference between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: Time Frame: from arrival in preoperative unit patient's departure from PACU and/or removal of IBP device, expected duration approximately between 2 and 8 hours

    Describe the difference, in mm of Hg, between intraoperative monitoring of noninvasive and invasive blood (NIBP-IBP) on systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressures

  2. Predictive factors associated with the between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurement differences

    Time frame: Time Frame: From patient file analysis at time of recruitment until patient's departure from PACU and/or removal of IBP device, expected duration approximately a year.

    Identify predictive factors (such as patient, surgery, and anesthesia characteristics) statistically associated with the appearance of NIBP-IBP measurement differences

Secondary outcomes

  1. Comparison of preoperative NIBP and pre-induction NIBP

    Time frame: From installation of non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) device in preop until installation of arterial line, pre-induction. Expected duration approximately between 1 and 2 hours.

    Compare preoperative non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements prior to the surgery and the average pre-induction NIBP recorded in the operating room

  2. Compare the discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements to the accuracy standards of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation

    Time frame: From installation of patient's arterial line until removal of patient's arterial line, expected duration approximately between 1 and 8 hours.

    Compare the NIBP-IBP discrepancy to the accuracy standards of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI): a maximal mean difference of 5 mm Hg and a standard deviation of 8 mm Hg.

  3. Impact of patient comorbidities (age, weight, height, BMI, heart condition, vascular condition) on occurrences of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: From patient file analysis at time of recruitment until the end of statistical analysis. Expected duration: up to a year.

    Evaluate the impact of patient's characteristics and comorbidities collected via REDCap questionnaire (age, weight, height, BMI, heart condition, vascular condition) on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP discrepancies.

  4. Statistical correlation between radial artery ultrasound measurements on the occurrence of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: From measurement of patient's radial artery via ultrasonography before induction until the end of statistical analysis. Expected duration: up to a year.

    Evaluate the impact, via statistical analysis, of radial artery ultrasound characteristics (inter-intima diameter, velocity) on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP discrepancies.

  5. Statistical correlation between administration of vasoactive drugs and fluids on the occurrence of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: From administration of first fluid or vasoactive drug until patient's departure from PACU and/or removal of arterial line. Expected duration between 2 and 8 hours.

    Evaluate the impact, via statistical analysis, of vasoactive drug administration and fluid (phenylephrine, ephedrine) administration on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP discrepancies

  6. Statistical correlation between surgical characteristics (approach, duration, type of surgery, etc) on the occurrence of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: From patient file analysis at time of recruitment until the end of statistical analysis. Expected duration up to a year.

    Evaluate the impact, via statistical analysis, of surgical characteristics (approach, duration, type of surgery, etc) on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP measurement discrepancies.

  7. Statistical correlation between anesthesia condition on the occurrence of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: From anesthesia induction until patient's departure from PACU and/or removal of arterial line, expected duration between 2 and 8 hours.

    Evaluate the impact of anesthesia condition (depth of anesthesia, nociception level) on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP discrepancies.

  8. Describe the incidence of overdamping and underdamping upon installation of the arterial line

    Time frame: from installation of radial line until removal of arterial line. Expected duration between 5 and 15 minutes.

    Describe the incidence of overdamping and underdamping upon installation of the arterial line

  9. Describe the impact of overdamping and underdamping upon installation of the arterial line on the occurrence of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: Time Frame : from installation of radial line until removal of radial line. Expected duration between 1 and 8 hours.

    Describe the impact of overdamping and underdamping upon installation of the arterial line on the occurrence of NIBP-IBP discrepancies

  10. Evaluate statistical correlation between anesthesiologist's confidence in the arterial line, and importance of discrepancies between non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements

    Time frame: from installation of radial line until patient's departure from PACU and/or removal of arterial line. Expected duration between 1 andd 8 hours.

    Evaluate the relation between the healthcare provider's confidence in the arterial line and the presence and importance of NIBP-IBP discrepancies. Confidence will be assessed at 30 minute intervals during the surgery by offering multiple choices for confidence ranking. Confidence scale will be as follows: 0= no trust in radial line, 1= weak trust in radial line, 2= moderate trust in radial line, 3=strong trust in radial line, 4= absolute trust in radial line

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Nadia Godin

CONTACT

[email protected]

514-252-3400 ext. 3193

Pascal Laferrière-Langlois

CONTACT

[email protected]

+1-819-432-5847

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Ciusss de L'Est de l'Île de Montréal

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Prospective Validation of Intraoperative Blood Pressure Monitors: the Influence of Site and Execution Strategy. The PROMISES Trial

Acronym: PROMISES

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2025
Study completion
2025
First posted
Jul 25, 2024
Registry last updated
Jul 25, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.