COMPARISON OF FINGER AND INTRA-ARTERIAL BLOOD-PRESSURE MONITORING AT REST AND DURING LABORATORY TESTING
COMPARISON OF FINGER AND INTRA-ARTERIAL BLOOD-PRESSURE MONITORING AT REST AND DURING LABORATORY TESTING
复制标题
DOI：
10.1161/01.hyp.13.6.647
复制
发表时间：
1989-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
8.3
通讯作者：
MANCIA, G
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
PARATI, G;CASADEI, R;MANCIA, G
通过与同时动脉内监测（静息时和进行已知会引起快速且通常显著的血压变化的试验期间）进行比较，评价了通过FINAPRES器械连续无创手指血压记录获得的血压值的准确性。在24名血压正常或原发性高血压受试者中进行了比较。在30分钟的休息时间内记录的手指和动脉内血压之间的平均差异为6.5 ±。2.6 mm Hg和5.4 ±. 2.9 mm Hg分别代表收缩压和舒张压;线性回归分析也证明了方法之间的密切对应关系。手指收缩压和舒张压的逐搏变化平均与在引起升压或降压反应的试验期间动脉内测量的变化相似（握力、冷加压试验、潜水试验、Valsalva动作、静脉注射苯妥英钠和三硝基甘油）以及在引起血管变化但血压无重大变化的试验期间（应用下体负压，被动抬腿）。收缩压和舒张压的平均方法间差异在血压变化评价中从未超过4.3和2.0 mm Hg;相应的标准差在4.6和1.6 mm Hg之间。当分别考虑动脉内和手指血压描记（分别为3.7和3.8 mm Hg）计算时，30分钟休息期间血压变异性的逐搏计算机分析提供的标准差几乎相同。这两种血压记录方法也允许获得对压力感受器控制心率（血管活性药物注射）和血压（颈室技术）的敏感性的类似评估。因此，通过FINAPRES进行的逐搏血压记录提供了受试者组桡动脉血压平均值和变异性的准确估计，在大多数情况下代表了实验室研究期间有创血压监测的可接受替代方案。
The accuracy of blood pressure values obtained by continuous noninvasive finger blood pressure recording via the FINAPRES device was evaluated by comparison with simultaneous intra-arterial monitoring both at rest and during performance of tests known to induce fast and often marked changes in blood pressure. The comparison was performed in 24 normotensive or essential hypertensive subjects. The average discrepancy between finger and intra-arterial blood pressure recorded over a 30-minute rest period was 6.5 .+-. 2.6 mm Hg and 5.4 .+-. 2.9 mm Hg for systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively; a close between-method correspondence was also demonstrated by linear regression analysis. The beat-to-beat changes in finger systolic and diastolic blood pressure were on average similar to those measured intra-arterially during tests that induced a pressor or depressor response (hand-grip, cold pressor test, diving test, Valsalva maneuver, intravenous injections of phenylephrine and trinitroglycerine) as well as during tests that caused vasomotor changes without major variations in blood pressure (application of lower body negative pressure, passive leg raising). The average between-method discrepancy in the evaluation of blood pressure changes was never greater than 4.3 and 2.0 mm Hg for systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively; the corresponding standard deviations ranged between 4.6 and 1.6 mm Hg. Beat-to-beat computer analysis of blood pressure variability over the 30-minute rest period provided standard deviations almost identical when calculated by separate consideration of intra-arterial and finger blood pressure tracings (3.7 and 3.8 mm Hg, respectively). The two methods of blood pressure recording also allowed similar assessments of the sensitivity of baroreceptor control of heart rate (vasoactive drug injections) and blood pressure (neck chamber technique) to be obtained. Thus, beat-to-beat blood pressure recording via FINAPRES provides an accurate estimate of means and variability of radial blood pressure in groups of subjects and represents in most cases an acceptable alternative to invasive blood pressure monitoring during laboratory studies.