Comparison of invasive dynamic blood pressure between superior mesenteric artery and common carotid artery in rats

doi:10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2020.02.007

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify the consistency of invasive dynamic blood pressure (BP) monitoring between the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and the common carotid artery (CCA).

METHODS: Eight male Sprague-Dawley rats were cannulated in SMA and CCA simultaneously for BP monitoring, respectively. The abdominal aorta was prepared for the induction of BP change through clamping/de-clamping by a microvascular clip. The dynamic BP monitoring was performed by a polygraph system. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) values would be recorded during different time periods: the baseline (T1), the increasing period after clamping (T2), the platform period during clamping (T3), the decreasing period after de-clamping (T4), and the final platform period (T5). Three trials were performed on each rat with 15-minute intervals between consecutive monitoring.

RESULTS: Systolic BP showed no significant differences between SMA and CCA. However, significant difference was found in diastolic blood pressure except at T5 (P=0.534). Mean arterial pressure of two arteries were significantly different only at T1 (P=0.015). The strength of association was significantly high between BP measurements through SMA and CCA (P<0.001). The Bland-Altman analyses showed that mean bias of MAP changed no more than 5 mmHg and standard deviation less than 8 mmHg during T2 and T4, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The study indicates SMA might be an alternative site for invasive BP monitoring during abdominal aorta occlusion and release, especially in cerebrovascular-related research.

Key words: Blood pressure, Superior mesenteric artery, Common carotid artery, Abdominal aorta

Rui-ning Liu, Xiao-jun Wei, Shao-ping Li, Cheng Jiang, Yan Zhao. Comparison of invasive dynamic blood pressure between superior mesenteric artery and common carotid artery in rats[J]. World Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2020, 11(2): 102-108.

Figures/Tables 5

Figure 1.

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Figure 2.

References 31

1	Wang Y, Cong Y, Li J, Li X, Li B, Qi S. Comparison of invasive blood pressure measurements from the caudal ventral artery and the femoral artery in male adult SD and Wistar rats. Plos One. 2013; 8(4):e60625. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060625 pmid: 23577136
2	Kurtz TW, Griffin KA, Bidani AK, Davisson RL, Hall JE. Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans and experimental animals. Part 2: Blood pressure measurement in experimental animals: a statement for professionals from the subcommittee of professional and public education of the American Heart Association council on high blood pressure research. Hypertension. 2005; 45(2):299-310. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000150857.39919.cb pmid: 15611363
3	Tiecks FP, Lam AM, Aaslid R, Newell DW. Comparison of static and dynamic cerebral autoregulation measurements. Stroke. 1995; 26(6):1014-9. doi: 10.1161/01.str.26.6.1014 pmid: 7762016
4	Perry MO. The hemodynamics of temporary abdominal aortic occlusion. Ann Surg. 1968; 168(2):193-200. pmid: 5664090
5	Li G, Shih Y, Garza BDL, Kiel J, Duong T. Assessment of cerebral autoregulation by inducing acute hypertension in rats. Medical Physics. 2012; 39:3927.
6	Thurston CL, Randich A. Acute increases in arterial blood pressure produced by occlusion of the abdominal aorta induces antinociception: peripheral and central substrates. Brain Res. 2012; 39(6Part25):3927.
7	Zeiler FA, Donnelly J, Calviello L, Smielewski P, Menon DK, Czosnyka M. Pressure autoregulation measurement techniques in adult traumatic brain injury, Part II: A Scoping review of continuous methods. J Neurotrauma. 2017; 34(23):3224-37. doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5086 pmid: 28699412
8	Wahlen BM, El-Menyar A, Asim M, Al-Thani H. Rapid sequence induction (RSI) in trauma patients: Insights from healthcare providers. World J Emerg Med. 2019; 10(1):19-26. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2019.01.003 pmid: 30598714
9	Baribeau YR, Westbrook BM, Charlesworth DC. Axillary cannulation: first choice for extra-aortic cannulation and brain protection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999; 118(6):1153-4. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70123-6 pmid: 10595999
10	Institute of Laboratory Animal Research: Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. 2011.
11	Zivin JA, DeGirolami U. Spinal cord infarction: a highly reproducible stroke model. Stroke. 1980; 11(2):200-2. doi: 10.1161/01.str.11.2.200 pmid: 7368250
12	Zaki R, Bulgiba A, Ismail R, Ismail NA. Statistical methods used to test for agreement of medical instruments measuring continuous variables in method comparison studies: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2012; 7(5):e37908. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037908 pmid: 22662248
13	Mignini MA, Piacentini E, Dubin A. Peripheral arterial blood pressure monitoring adequately tracks central arterial blood pressure in critically ill patients: an observational study. Crit Care. 2006; 10(2):R43. doi: 10.1186/cc4852 pmid: 16542489
14	Ahmad RA, Ahmad S, Naveed A, Baig M. Peripheral arterial blood pressure versus central crterial blood pressure monitoring in critically ill patients after cardio-pulmonary bypass. Pak J Med Sci. 2017; 33(2):310-4. pmid: 28523028
15	Monteiro ER, Campagnol D, Bajotto GC, Simoes CR, Rassele AC. Effects of 8 hemodynamic conditions on direct blood pressure values obtained simultaneously from the carotid, femoral and dorsal pedal arteries in dogs. J Vet Cardiol. 2013; 15(4):263-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jvc.2013.07.002 pmid: 24262114
16	Li WY, Wang XH, Lu LC, Li H. Discrepancy of blood pressure between the brachial artery and radial artery. World J Emerg Med. 2013; 4(4):294-7. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.issn.1920-8642.2013.04.010 pmid: 25215136
17	Lakhal K, Robert-Edan V. Invasive monitoring of blood pressure: a radiant future for brachial artery as an alternative to radial artery catheterisation? J Thorac Dis. 2017; 9(12):4812-6. pmid: 29312664
18	Vinson DR, Kea B. Understanding the effect of propofol and electrical cardioversion on the systolic blood pressure of emergency department patients with atrial fibrillation. World J Emerg Med. 2018; 9(1):76. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2018.01.014 pmid: 29290902
19	Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999; 8(2):135-60. doi: 10.1177/096228029900800204 pmid: 10501650
20	Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307-10. pmid: 2868172
21	Da CA, Ramos SJ, Domingues M, Beaufrere H, Shelby A, Stout R, et al. Agreement between two oscillometric blood pressure technologies and invasively measured arterial pressure in the dog. Vet Anaesth Analg. 2016; 43(2):199-203. doi: 10.1111/vaa.12312
22	Brown S, Atkins C, Bagley R, Carr A, Cowgill L, Davidson M, et al. Guidelines for the identification, evaluation, and management of systemic hypertension in dogs and cats. J Vet Intern Med. 2007; 21(3):542-58. doi: 10.1892/0891-6640(2007)21[542:gftiea]2.0.co;2 pmid: 17552466
23	Cerejo SA, Teixeira-Neto FJ, Garofalo NA, Rodrigues JC, Celeita-Rodriguez N, Lagos-Carvajal AP. Comparison of two species-specific oscillometric blood pressure monitors with direct blood pressure measurement in anesthetized cats. J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2017; 27(4):409-18.
24	Saeed NP, Horsfield MA, Panerai RB, Mistri AK, Robinson TG. Measurement of cerebral blood flow responses to the thigh cuff maneuver: a comparison of TCD with a novel MRI method. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011; 31(5):1302-10. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.225 pmid: 21189480
25	van Beek AH, Claassen JA, Rikkert MG, Jansen RW. Cerebral autoregulation: an overview of current concepts and methodology with special focus on the elderly. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2008; 28(6):1071-85. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2008.13 pmid: 18349877
26	Sigurdsson ST, Paulson OB, Hoj NA, Strandgaard S. Bradykinin antagonist counteracts the acute effect of both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and of angiotensin receptor blockade on the lower limit of autoregulation of cerebral blood flow. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2014; 34(3):467-71. pmid: 24326391
27	Berg RM, Plovsing RR, Bailey DM, Holstein-Rathlou NH, Moller K. The Dynamic cerebral autoregulatory adaptive response to noradrenaline is attenuated during systemic inflammation in humans. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2015; 42(7):740-6. doi: 10.1111/1440-1681.12421
28	Li G, Shih YY, Kiel JW, De La Garza BH, Du F, Duong TQ. MRI study of cerebral, retinal and choroidal blood flow responses to acute hypertension. Exp Eye Res. 2013; 112:118-24. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2013.04.003
29	Khir AW, Zambanini A, Parker KH. Local and regional wave speed in the aorta: effects of arterial occlusion. Med Eng Phys. 2004; 26(1):23-9. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2003.08.004 pmid: 14644595
30	Khir AW, Parker KH. Wave intensity in the ascending aorta: effects of arterial occlusion. J Biomech. 2005; 38(4):647-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.039 pmid: 15713284
31	Kolb B, Rotella DL, Stauss HM. Frequency response characteristics of cerebral blood flow autoregulation in rats. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007; 292(1):H432-8. pmid: 16963612

Time	SBP			DBP			MAP
Time	SMA	CCA	P value	SMA	CCA	P value	SMA	CCA	P value
T1	132±10	132±11	0.987	119±9	117±10	0.001	123±9	122±10	0.015
T2	27±6	28±8	0.241	22±5	20±6	0.001	23±5	23±5	0.054
T3	146±12	148±12	0.057	130±9	128±9	0.000	136±10	135±10	0.068
T4	51±10	52±10	0.306	46±10	44±9	0.013	48±10	47±9	0.300
T5	119±18	120±17	0.142	107±17	107±17	0.534	111±17	111±17	0.873

Parameters	T1	T2	T3	T4	T5	P value
SBP	0.872	0.708	0.822	0.903	0.917	<0.001
DBP	0.903	0.872	0.868	0.954	0.934	<0.001
MAP	0.910	0.951	0.896	0.972	0.933	<0.001

Parameters		T1	T2	T3	T4	T5
SBP (mmHg)	Bias (SD)	0 (5.5)	-1.4 (5.6)	-1.6 (7.1)	-1.0 (4.5)	-1.0 (7.4)
	95% LOA	-10.8 to10.8	-12.3 to 9.6	-15.5 to 12.3	-9.8 to7.8	-15.4 to 13.4
DBP (mmHg)	Bias (SD)	1.3 (4.3)	2.2 (2.7)	2.3 (4.7)	1.7 (3.0)	0.4 (6.2)
	95% LOA	-7.2 to 9.8	-3.1 to 7.5	-7.0 to 11.5	-4.3 to 7.6	-11.7 to 12.4
MAP (mmHg)	Bias (SD)	1.0 (4.3)	0.7 (1.7)	1.0 (4.5)	0.5 (2.5)	-0.1 (6.3)
	95% LOA	-7.4 to 9.3	-2.6 to 4.1	-7.8 to 9.7	-4.4 to5.4	-12.4 to 12.2

[1]	Nishant Raj Pandey, Yu-yao Bian, Song-tao Shou. Significance of blood pressure variability in patients with sepsis [J]. World Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2014, 5(1): 42-47.
[2]	Wen-yuan Li, Xiao-hai Wang, Li-chong Lu, Hao Li. Discrepancy of blood pressure between the brachial artery and radial artery [J]. World Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2013, 4(4): 294-297.
[3]	Zhi-xiang Xie, Shu-yin Wang, Zi-jing Liang, Liang-bo Zeng. Effect of Zhenwu Tang Granule on pressure-overloaded left ventricular myocardial hypertrophy in rats [J]. World Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2010, 1(2): 149-153.