Risk Factors Involved in Central-to-Radial Arterial Pressure Gradient During Cardiac Surgery
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: A central-to-radial arterial pressure gradient may occur after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), which, in some patients, may last for a prolonged time after CPB. Whenever there is a pressure gradient, the radial artery pressure measure may underestimate a more centrally measured systemic pressure, which may result in a misguided therapeutic strategy. It is clinically important to identify the risk factors that may predict the appearance of a central-to-radial pressure gradient, because more central sites of measurements might then be considered to monitor systemic arterial pressure in high-risk patients. The objective of this study was to assess preoperative and intraoperative risk factors for central-to-radial pressure gradient. METHODS: Seventy-three patients undergoing cardiac surgery using CPB were included in this prospective observational study. A significant central-to-radial arterial pressure gradient was defined as a difference of 25 mm Hg in systolic pressure or 10 mm Hg in mean arterial pressure for a minimum of 5 minutes. Preoperative data included demographics, presence of comorbidities, and medications. Intraoperative data included type of surgery, CPB and aortic clamping time, use of inotropic drugs, and vasodilators or vasopressors agents. The diameter of the radial and femoral artery was measured before the induction of anesthesia using B-mode ultrasonography. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients developed a central-to-radial arterial pressure gradient (45%). Patients with a significant pressure gradient had a smaller weight (71.0 ± 16.9 vs 79.3 ± 17.3 kg, P = 0.041), a smaller height (162.0 ± 9.6 vs 166.3 ± 8.6 cm, P = 0.047), a smaller radial artery diameter (0.24 ± 0.03 vs 0.29 ± 0.05 cm, P < 0.001), and were at a higher risk as determined by the Parsonnet score (30.3 ± 24.9 vs 17.0 ± 10.9, P = 0.007). In addition, a longer aortic clamping time (85.8 ± 51.0 vs 64.2 ± 29.3 minutes, P = 0.036), mitral and complex surgery (P = 0.007 and P = 0.017, respectively), and administration of vasopressin (P = 0.039) were identified as potential independent predictors of a central-to-radial pressure gradient. By using multivariate logistic regression analysis, the following independent risk factors were identified: Parsonnet score (odds ratio [OR], 1.076; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.027-1.127, P = 0.002), aortic clamping time >90 minutes (OR, 8.521; 95% CI, 1.917-37.870, P = 0.005), and patient height (OR, 0.933, 95% CI, 0.876-0.993, P = 0.029). The relative risk (RR) estimates remained statistically significant for the Parsonnet score and the aortic clamping time ≥90 minutes (RR, 1.010; 95% CI, 1.003-1.018, P = 0.009 and RR, 2.253; 95% CI, 1.475-3.443, P < 0.001 respectively) while showing a trend for patient height (RR, 0.974; 95% CI, 0.948-1.001, P = 0.058). CONCLUSIONS: Central-to-radial gradients are common in cardiac surgery. The threshold for using a central site for blood pressure monitoring should be low in small, high-risk patients undergoing longer surgical interventions to avoid inappropriate administration of vasopressors and/or inotropic agents.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».