Is Invasive Pressure Monitoring More Reliable Than Non-Invasive in Patients with Cardiovascular Pathology? - A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) require strict arterial blood pressure (BP) control to maintain adequate cerebral perfusion. Invasive blood pressure (IBP) is the gold standard, however artifacts may lead to erroneous readings.

METHODS: We report a case of CEA using IBP monitoring.

RESULTS: A 64-year-old man, American Society Anaesthesiology (ASA) physical status 3 (diffuse atheromathosis, dyslipidemia and non-medicated hypertension), was presented for an elective right CEA. ASA standard, neuromuscular block monitoring, anesthesia depth and cerebral oximetry were used as monitorization. On preanaesthetic assessment noninvasive BP (NIBP) had no significant difference between right and left arms (180/90 mmHg). IBP monitoring was placed in left radial artery after several attempts in both arms. Surgery was performed under balanced general anesthesia (GA). Intra-operatively the patient remained stable (140/86 mmHg) however the systolic carotid artery stump pressure (SP) was 210-220mmHg. This finding was confirmed by measuring NIBP in both legs. At this point NIBP was used to monitor and guide the BP target until the end of the procedure and during postoperative period (PO) in postanesthetic care unit (PACU). Surgery proceeded uneventfully. After discharge to the ward (48h stay at PACU), a hypertensive crisis lead to cervical neck haematoma which required emergent surgery under GA. Intraoperatively the BP was assessed with NIBP. After a new period of 48h at PACU the patient was discharged to the ward and subsequently from the hospital on the 8th postoperative day, without further complications.

CONCLUSION: IBP allow beat-by-beat measures with optimization of BP in order to improve cerebral perfusion during CEA. IBP can be inaccurate in patients with diffuse atheromatosis. NIBP may be an alternative, however is not continuous and is expected to be less accurate than the IBP.1 The high IBP-NIBP difference (>40 mmHg) was clinically relevant and in this patient might be explained by diffuse atheromatosis. NIBP was compatible with carotid SP, indicating that, in this case was a reliable and accurate method of monitoring.