Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To compare noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements with invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements of arterial blood pressure (ABP) in anesthetized dogs as obtained with a veterinary-specific multiparameter monitor.
ANIMALS
21 client-owned healthy female dogs anesthetized for routine ovariohysterectomy.
PROCEDURES
ABP measurements were obtained with a single veterinary-specific multiparameter monitor via a pneumatic cuff placed over the medial dorsal metatarsal artery (NIBP) and a transducer connected to a catheter placed in the contralateral artery (IBP). The 224 paired ABP measurements (complete data set) were categorized into 3 subsets—hypotension, normotension, and hypertension—on the basis of invasive measurements of mean arterial blood pressure (MAP). The NIBP and IBP measurements of systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure (SAP and DAP, respectively) and MAP were compared.
RESULTS
NIBP measurements were frequently lower than IBP measurements. The greatest underestimation was for the hypertension subset of NIBP measurements, with biases for SAP of 15.7 mm Hg, DAP of 14.1 mm Hg, and MAP of 12.0 mm Hg. Considering the complete data set, precision was acceptable (SD of the differences between paired measurements ≤ 15 mm Hg for DAP [9.0 mm Hg] and MAP [12.1 mm Hg]); however, precision was not acceptable for SAP (SD, 18.6 mm Hg).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE
NIBP measurements with the studied veterinary-specific multiparameter monitor generally agreed with IBP measurements during hypotensive and normotensive periods for anesthetized healthy female dogs undergoing routine ovariohysterectomy. However, inaccuracies, frequently underestimations, were observed during periods of hypertension, and therefore, NIBP measurements should be interpreted cautiously.
