Wearable sensors to continuously measure blood pressure and derived cardiovascular variables have the potential to revolutionize patient monitoring. Current wearable methods analyzing time components (e.g., pulse transit time) still lack clinical accuracy, whereas existing technologies for direct blood pressure measurement are too bulky. Here we present an innovative art of continuous noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring (CNAP2GO). It directly measures blood pressure by using a volume control technique and could be used for small wearable sensors integrated in a finger-ring. As a software prototype, CNAP2GO showed excellent blood pressure measurement performance in comparison with invasive reference measurements in 46 patients having surgery. The resulting pulsatile blood pressure signal carries information to derive cardiac output and other hemodynamic variables. We show that CNAP2GO can self-calibrate and be miniaturized for wearable approaches. CNAP2GO potentially constitutes the breakthrough for wearable sensors for blood pressure and flow monitoring in both ambulatory and in-hospital clinical settings.

BACKGROUND: Continuous monitoring of arterial pressure is important in severely obese patients who are at particular risk for cardiovascular complications. Innovative technologies for continuous noninvasive arterial pressure monitoring are now available. In this study, we compared noninvasive arterial pressure measurements using the vascular unloading technique (Clearsight system; Edwards Lifesciences Corp, Irvine, CA) with invasive arterial pressure measurements (radial arterial catheter) in severely obese patients during laparoscopic bariatric surgery. METHODS: In 35 severely obese patients (median body mass index, 47 kg/m2), we simultaneously recorded noninvasive and invasive arterial pressure measurements over a period of 45 minutes. We compared noninvasive (test method) and invasive (reference method) arterial pressure measurements (sampling rate 1 Hz = 1/s) using Bland-Altman analysis (accounting for multiple measurements per subject), 4-quadrant plot/concordance analysis (2-minute interval, 5 mm Hg exclusion zone), and error grid analysis (calculating the proportions of measurements in risk zones A–E with A indicating no risk, B low risk, C moderate risk, D significant risk, and E dangerous risk for the patient due to the risk of wrong clinical interventions because of measurement errors). RESULTS: We observed a mean of the differences (±SD, 95% limits of agreement) between the noninvasively and invasively assessed arterial pressure values of 1.1 mm Hg (±7.4 mm Hg, −13.5 to 15.6 mm Hg) for mean arterial pressure (MAP), 6.8 mm Hg (±10.3 mm Hg, −14.4 to 27.9 mm Hg) for systolic arterial pressure, and 0.8 mm Hg (±6.9 mm Hg, −12.9 to 14.4 mm Hg) for diastolic arterial pressure. The 4-quadrant plot concordance rate (ie, the proportion of arterial pressure measurement pairs showing concordant changes to all changes) was 93% (CI, 89%–96%) for MAP, 93% (CI, 89%–97%) for systolic arterial pressure, and 88% (CI, 84%–92%) for diastolic arterial pressure. Error grid analysis showed that the proportions of measurements in risk zones A–E were 89.5%, 10.0%, 0.5%, 0%, and 0% for MAP and 93.7%, 6.0%, 0.3%, 0%, and 0% for systolic arterial pressure, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: During laparoscopic bariatric surgery, the accuracy and precision of the vascular unloading technique (Clearsight system) was good for MAP and diastolic arterial pressure, but only moderate for systolic arterial pressure according to Bland-Altman analysis. The system showed good trending capabilities. In the error grid analysis, >99% of vascular unloading technique–derived arterial pressure measurements were categorized in no- or low-risk zones.

It remains unclear whether reduced myocardial contractility, venous dilation with decreased venous return, or arterial dilation with reduced systemic vascular resistance contribute most to hypotension after induction of general anesthesia. We sought to assess the relative contribution of various hemodynamic mechanisms to hypotension after induction of general anesthesia with sufentanil, propofol, and rocuronium. In this prospective observational study, we continuously recorded hemodynamic variables during anesthetic induction using a finger-cuff method in 92 non-cardiac surgery patients. After sufentanil administration, there was no clinically important change in arterial pressure, but heart rate increased from baseline by 11 (99.89% confidence interval: 7 to 16) bpm (P < 0.001). After administration of propofol, mean arterial pressure decreased by 23 (17 to 28) mmHg and systemic vascular resistance index decreased by 565 (419 to 712) dyn*s*cm−5*m2 (P values < 0.001). Mean arterial pressure was < 65 mmHg in 27 patients (29%). After propofol administration, heart rate returned to baseline, and stroke volume index and cardiac index remained stable. After tracheal intubation, there were no clinically important differences compared to baseline in heart rate, stroke volume index, and cardiac index, but arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance index remained markedly decreased. Anesthetic induction with sufentanil, propofol, and rocuronium reduced arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance index. Heart rate, stroke volume index, and cardiac index remained stable. Post-induction hypotension therefore appears to result from arterial dilation with reduced systemic vascular resistance rather than venous dilation or reduced myocardial contractility.