Since both, hypotension and hypertension, can potentially impair the function of vital organs such as heart, brain, or kidneys, monitoring of arterial blood pressure (BP) is a mainstay of hemodynamic monitoring in acutely or critically ill patients. Arterial BP can either be obtained invasively via an arterial catheter or non-invasively. Non-invasive BP measurement provides either intermittent or continuous readings. Most commonly, an occluding upper arm cuff is used for intermittent non-invasive monitoring. BP values are then obtained either manually (by auscultation of Korotkoff sounds or palpation) or automatically (e.g., by oscillometry). For continuous non-invasive BP monitoring, the volume clamp method or arterial applanation tonometry can be used. Both techniques enable the arterial waveform and BP values to be obtained continuously. This article describes the different techniques for non-invasive BP measurement, their advantages and limitations, and their clinical applicability.
Critically ill patients require close hemodynamic monitoring to titrate treatment on a regular basis. It allows administering fluid with parsimony and adjusting inotropes and vasoactive drugs when necessary. Although invasive monitoring is considered as the reference method, non-invasive monitoring presents the obvious advantage of being associated with fewer complications, at the expanse of accuracy, precision, and step-response change. A great many methods and devices are now used over the world, and this article focuses on several of them, providing with a brief review of related underlying physical principles and validation articles analysis. Reviewed methods include electrical bioimpedance and bioreactance, respiratory-derived cardiac output (CO) monitoring technique, pulse wave transit time, ultrasound CO monitoring, multimodal algorithmic estimation, and inductance thoracocardiography. Quality criteria with which devices were reviewed included: accuracy (closeness of agreement between a measurement value and a true value of the measured), precision (closeness of agreement between replicate measurements on the same or similar objects under specified conditions), and step response change (delay between physiological change and its indication). Our conclusion is that the offer of non-invasive monitoring has improved in the past few years, even though further developments are needed to provide clinicians with sufficiently accurate devices for routine use, as alternative to invasive monitoring devices.