Make my haemodynamic monitor GREEN: sustainable monitoring solutions.

Anaesthesiologists overwhelmingly favour pulse wave analysis techniques as their primary method to monitor cardiac output during high-risk noncardiac surgery. In patients with a radial arterial catheter in place, pulse wave analysis techniques have the advantage of instantly providing non-operator-dependent and continuous haemodynamic monitoring information. Green pulse wave analysis techniques working with any standard pressure transducer are as reliable as techniques requiring dedicated pressure transducers. They have the advantage of minimising plastic waste and related carbon dioxide emissions, and also significantly reducing hospital costs. The future integration of pulse wave analysis algorithms into multivariable bedside monitors, obviating the need for standalone haemodynamic monitors, could lead to wider use of haemodynamic monitoring solutions by further reducing their cost and carbon footprint.

Towards the automatic detection and correction of abnormal arterial pressure waveforms.

Both over and underdamping of the arterial pressure waveform are frequent during continuous invasive radial pressure monitoring. They may influence systolic blood pressure measurements and the accuracy of cardiac output monitoring with pulse wave analysis techniques. It is therefore recommended to regularly perform fast flush tests to unmask abnormal damping. Smart algorithms have recently been developed for the automatic detection of abnormal damping. In case of overdamping, air bubbles, kinking, and partial obstruction of the arterial catheter should be suspected and eliminated. In the case of underdamping, resonance filters may be necessary to normalize the arterial pressure waveform and ensure accurate hemodynamic measurements.

Haemodynamic monitoring during noncardiac surgery: past, present, and future.

During surgery, various haemodynamic variables are monitored and optimised to maintain organ perfusion pressure and oxygen delivery - and to eventually improve outcomes. Important haemodynamic variables that provide an understanding of most pathophysiologic haemodynamic conditions during surgery include heart rate, arterial pressure, central venous pressure, pulse pressure variation/stroke volume variation, stroke volume, and cardiac output. A basic physiologic and pathophysiologic understanding of these haemodynamic variables and the corresponding monitoring methods is essential. We therefore revisit the pathophysiologic rationale for intraoperative monitoring of haemodynamic variables, describe the history, current use, and future technological developments of monitoring methods, and finally briefly summarise the evidence that haemodynamic management can improve patient-centred outcomes.

Impact of continuous and wireless monitoring of vital signs on clinical outcomes: a propensity-matched observational study of surgical ward patients.

BACKGROUND: Continuous and wireless vital sign monitoring is superior to intermittent monitoring in detecting vital sign abnormalities; however, the impact on clinical outcomes has not been established. METHODS: We performed a propensity-matched analysis of data describing patients admitted to general surgical wards between January 2018 and December 2019 at a single, tertiary medical centre in the USA. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality or ICU transfer during hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes were the odds of individual components of the primary outcome, and heart failure, myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, and rapid response team activations. Data are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and n (%). RESULTS: We initially screened a population of 34,636 patients (mean age 58.3 (Range 18-101) yr, 16,456 (47.5%) women. After propensity matching, intermittent monitoring (n=12 345) was associated with increased risk of a composite of mortality or ICU admission (OR 3.42, 95% CI 3.19-3.67; P<0.001), and heart failure (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.21-1.81; P<0.001), myocardial infarction (OR 3.87, 95% CI 2.71-5.71; P<0.001), and acute kidney injury (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.57; P<0.001) compared with continuous wireless monitoring (n=7955). The odds of rapid response team intervention were similar in both groups (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-1.06; P=0.726). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received continuous ward monitoring were less likely to die or be admitted to ICU than those who received intermittent monitoring. These findings should be confirmed in prospective randomised trials.

Intraoperative blood pressure: could less be more?

Retrospective observational studies have reported a significant association between intraoperative hypotension and postoperative morbidity. However, association does not imply causation, and whether preventing intraoperative hypotension can improve patient outcome remains to be demonstrated. In this issue of the British Journal of Anaesthesia, D'Amico and colleagues meta-analysed 10 prospective randomised trials comparing low (≤60 mm Hg) and higher mean arterial pressure targets during anaesthesia and surgery. They did not observe an increase in postoperative morbidity and mortality in the low target group. In contrast, they reported a statistically significant (but not clinically relevant) reduction in postoperative cardiac arrhythmia and hospital length of stay when targeting mean arterial pressure ≤60 mm Hg. These findings suggest that during most surgical cases, intraoperative hypotension is a marker of the severity, frailty, or both rather than a mediator of postoperative complications.

Pulse contour techniques for perioperative hemodynamic monitoring: A nationwide carbon footprint and cost estimation.

BACKGROUND: The question of environmentally sustainable perioperative medicine represents a new challenge in an era of cost constraints and climate crisis. The French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care (SFAR) recommends stroke volume optimization in high-risk surgical patients. Pulse contour techniques have become increasingly popular for stroke volume monitoring during surgery. Some require the use of specific disposable pressure transducers (DPTs), whereas others can be used with standard DPTs. OBJECTIVE: Quantify and compare the carbon footprint and cost of pulse contour techniques using specific and standard DPTs on a yearly basis and at a national level. METHODS: We estimated the number of high-risk surgical patients monitored every year in France with a pulse contour technique, and the plastic waste, carbon footprint and cost associated with the use of specific and standard DPTs. MAIN FINDINGS: When compared to pulse contour techniques working with a standard DPT, techniques requiring a specific DPT are responsible for an increase in carbon dioxide emission estimated at 65-83 tons/yr and for additional hospital cost estimated at €67 million/yr. If, as recommended by the SFAR, all high-risk surgical patients were monitored, the difference would reach 179-227 tons/yr for the environmental impact and €187 million/yr for the economic impact. CONCLUSION: From an environmental and economic standpoint, pulse contour techniques working with standard DPTs should be recommended for the perioperative hemodynamic monitoring of high-risk surgical patients.

Predicting intraoperative hypotension: from hope to hype and back to reality.

The analysis of arterial pressure waveforms with machine learning algorithms has been proposed to predict intraoperative hypotension. The ability to forecast arterial hypotension 5-15 min ahead of the fall in blood pressure allows clinicians to be pro-active instead of reactive, and could potentially decrease postoperative morbidity. However, the predictive value of machine learning algorithms has been overestimated due to selection bias in several clinical studies, and they might not be superior to mere observation of arterial pressure. Continuous blood pressure monitoring enables immediate detection of hypotension, and giving fluid, vasopressors or inotropes to patients who are not yet (and might never become) hypotensive based on an algorithm is questionable. Finally, recent prospective interventional studies suggest that reducing intraoperative hypotension does not improve postoperative outcomes.

Machine learning for the real-time assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction in critically ill patients: a bedside evaluation by novices and experts in echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning algorithms have recently been developed to enable the automatic and real-time echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and have not been evaluated in critically ill patients. METHODS: Real-time LVEF was prospectively measured in 95 ICU patients with a machine learning algorithm installed on a cart-based ultrasound system. Real-time measurements taken by novices (LVEFNov) and by experts (LVEFExp) were compared with LVEF reference measurements (LVEFRef) taken manually by echo experts. RESULTS: LVEFRef ranged from 26 to 80% (mean 54 ± 12%), and the reproducibility of measurements was 9 ± 6%. Thirty patients (32%) had a LVEFRef < 50% (left ventricular systolic dysfunction). Real-time LVEFExp and LVEFNov measurements ranged from 31 to 68% (mean 54 ± 10%) and from 28 to 70% (mean 54 ± 9%), respectively. The reproducibility of measurements was comparable for LVEFExp (5 ± 4%) and for LVEFNov (6 ± 5%) and significantly better than for reference measurements (p < 0.001). We observed a strong relationship between LVEFRef and both real-time LVEFExp (r = 0.86, p < 0.001) and LVEFNov (r = 0.81, p < 0.001). The average difference (bias) between real time and reference measurements was 0 ± 6% for LVEFExp and 0 ± 7% for LVEFNov. The sensitivity to detect systolic dysfunction was 70% for real-time LVEFExp and 73% for LVEFNov. The specificity to detect systolic dysfunction was 98% both for LVEFExp and LVEFNov. CONCLUSION: Machine learning-enabled real-time measurements of LVEF were strongly correlated with manual measurements obtained by experts. The accuracy of real-time LVEF measurements was excellent, and the precision was fair. The reproducibility of LVEF measurements was better with the machine learning system. The specificity to detect left ventricular dysfunction was excellent both for experts and for novices, whereas the sensitivity could be improved. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05336448. Retrospectively registered on April 19, 2022.

Evaluation of a new smartphone optical blood pressure application (OptiBP™) in the post-anesthesia care unit: a method comparison study against the non-invasive automatic oscillometric brachial cuff as the reference method.

We compared blood pressure (BP) values obtained with a new optical smartphone application (OptiBP™) with BP values obtained using a non-invasive automatic oscillometric brachial cuff (reference method) during the first 2 h of surveillance in a post-anesthesia care unit in patients after non-cardiac surgery. Three simultaneous BP measurements of both methods were recorded every 30 min over a 2-h period. The agreement between measurements was investigated using Bland-Altman and error grid analyses. We also evaluated the performance of the OptiBP™ using ISO81060-2:2018 standards which requires the mean of the differences ± standard deviation (SD) between both methods to be less than 5 mmHg ± 8 mmHg. Of 120 patients enrolled, 101 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a mean of the differences ± SD between the test and reference methods of + 1 mmHg ± 7 mmHg for mean arterial pressure (MAP), + 2 mmHg ± 11 mmHg for systolic arterial pressure (SAP), and + 1 mmHg ± 8 mmHg for diastolic arterial pressure (DAP). Error grid analysis showed that the proportions of measurement pairs in risk zones A to E were 90.3% (no risk), 9.7% (low risk), 0% (moderate risk), 0% (significant risk), 0% (dangerous risk) for MAP and 89.9%, 9.1%, 1%, 0%, 0% for SAP. We observed a good agreement between BP values obtained by the OptiBP™ system and BP values obtained with the reference method. The OptiBP™ system fulfilled the AAMI validation requirements for MAP and DAP and error grid analysis indicated that the vast majority of measurement pairs (≥ 99%) were in risk zones A and B.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04262323.

Wireless wearables for postoperative surveillance on surgical wards: a survey of 1158 anaesthesiologists in Western Europe and the USA.

Background: Several continuous monitoring solutions, including wireless wearable sensors, are available or being developed to improve patient surveillance on surgical wards. We designed a survey to understand the current perception and expectations of anaesthesiologists who, as perioperative physicians, are increasingly involved in postoperative care. Methods: The survey was shared in 40 university hospitals from Western Europe and the USA. Results: From 5744 anaesthesiologists who received the survey link, there were 1158 valid questionnaires available for analysis. Current postoperative surveillance was mainly based on intermittent spot-checks of vital signs every 4-6 h in the USA (72%) and every 8-12 h in Europe (53%). A majority of respondents (91%) considered that continuous monitoring of vital signs should be available on surgical wards and that wireless sensors are preferable to tethered systems (86%). Most respondents indicated that oxygen saturation (93%), heart rate (80%), and blood pressure (71%) should be continuously monitored with wrist devices (71%) or skin adhesive patches (54%). They believed it may help detect clinical deterioration earlier (90%), decrease rescue interventions (59%), and decrease hospital mortality (54%). Opinions diverged regarding the impact on nurse workload (increase 46%, decrease 39%), and most respondents considered that the biggest implementation challenges are economic (79%) and connectivity issues (64%). Conclusion: Continuous monitoring of vital signs with wireless sensors is wanted by most anaesthesiologists from university hospitals in Western Europe and in the USA. They believe it may improve patient safety and outcome, but may also be challenging to implement because of cost and connectivity issues.

Impact of conventional vs. goal-directed fluid therapy on urethral tissue perfusion in patients undergoing liver surgery: A pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although fluid administration is a key strategy to optimise haemodynamic status and tissue perfusion, optimal fluid administration during liver surgery remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) strategy, when compared with a conventional fluid strategy, would better optimise systemic blood flow and lead to improved urethral tissue perfusion (a new variable to assess peripheral blood flow), without increasing blood loss. DESIGN: Single-centre prospective randomised controlled superiority study. SETTING: Erasme Hospital. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing liver surgery. INTERVENTION: Forty patients were randomised into two groups: all received a basal crystalloid infusion (maximum 2 ml kg-1 h-1). In the conventional fluid group, the goal was to maintain central venous pressure (CVP) as low as possible during the dissection phase by giving minimal additional fluid, while in the posttransection phase, anaesthetists were free to compensate for any presumed fluid deficit. In the GDFT group, patients received in addition to the basal infusion, multiple minifluid challenges of crystalloid to maintain stroke volume (SV) variation less than 13%. Noradrenaline infusion was titrated to keep mean arterial pressure more than 65 mmHg in all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The mean intra-operative urethral perfusion index. RESULTS: The mean urethral perfusion index was significantly higher in the GDFT group than in the conventional fluid group (8.70 [5.72 to 13.10] vs. 6.05 [4.95 to 8.75], P = 0.046). SV index (ml m-2) and cardiac index (l min-1 m-2) were higher in the GDFT group (48 ±â€Š9 vs. 33 ±â€Š7 and 3.5 ±â€Š0.7 vs. 2.4 ±â€Š0.4, respectively; P < 0.001). Although CVP was higher in the GDFT group (9.3 ±â€Š2.5 vs. 6.5 ±â€Š2.9 mmHg; P = 0.003), intra-operative blood loss was not significantly different in the two groups. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing liver surgery, a GDFT strategy resulted in a higher mean urethral perfusion index than did a conventional fluid strategy and did not increase blood loss despite higher CVP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04092608.

Clinical evaluation of a wearable sensor for mobile monitoring of respiratory rate on hospital wards.

A wireless and wearable system was recently developed for mobile monitoring of respiratory rate (RR). The present study was designed to compare RR mobile measurements with reference capnographic measurements on a medical-surgical ward. The wearable sensor measures impedance variations of the chest from two thoracic and one abdominal electrode. Simultaneous measurements of RR from the wearable sensor and from the capnographic sensor (1 measure/minute) were compared in 36 ward patients. Patients were monitored for a period of 182 ± 56 min (range 68-331). Artifact-free RR measurements were available 81% of the monitoring time for capnography and 92% for the wearable monitoring system (p < 0.001). A total of 4836 pairs of simultaneous measurements were available for analysis. The average reference RR was 19 ± 5 breaths/min (range 6-36). The average difference between the wearable and capnography RR measurements was - 0.6 ± 2.5 breaths/min. Error grid analysis showed that the proportions of RR measurements done with the wearable system were 89.7% in zone A (no risk), 9.6% in zone B (low risk) and < 1% in zones C, D and E (moderate, significant and dangerous risk). The wearable method detected RR values > 20 (tachypnea) with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 93%. In ward patients, the wearable sensor enabled accurate and precise measurements of RR within a relatively broad range (6-36 b/min) and the detection of tachypnea with high sensitivity and specificity.