Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2020
Accuracy and trending abilities of finger plethysmographic blood pressure and cardiac output compared to invasive measurements during caesarean delivery in healthy women: an observational study.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01861132 (Validation of Non-invasive Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Cardiac Output in Healthy Pregnant Women During Cesarean Section), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Validation of Non-invasive Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Cardiac Output in Healthy Pregnant Women During Cesarean Section
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy and precision of continuous, non-invasive blood pressure devices: a systematic review and meta-analyses.Anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Agreement and trending ability between non-invasive and invasive hemodynamic monitoring during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Predicting in-hospital indicators from wearable-derived signals for cardiovascular and respiratory disease monitoring: An in silico study.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Inverse Association between Exercising Blood Pressure Response and Left Ventricular Chamber Size and Mass in Women Who Habitually Resistance Train.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Accuracy and trending ability of finger plethysmographic cardiac output monitoring in late pregnancy.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn women presenting for caesarean section under spinal anesthesia, continuous measurement of circulatory aspects, such as blood pressure and cardiac output, is often needed. At present, invasive techniques are used almost exclusively. Reliable non-invasive monitoring would be welcome, as it could be safer, less uncomfortable, and quick and easy to apply. We aimed to evaluate whether a non-invasive, finger plethysmographic device, the ccNexFin monitor, can replace invasively measured blood pressure in the radial artery, and whether cardiac output measurements from this device can be used interchangeably with measurements from the mini-invasive LiDCO monitor currently in use at our institution.
methodsSimultaneous invasive measurements were compared to ccNexFin in 23 healthy women during elective caesarean section under spinal anesthesia. We used Bland Altman statistics to assess agreement, and polar plot methodology to judge trending abilities with pre-defined limits.
resultsMean arterial and systolic pressures showed biases (invasive - ccNexFin) of - 4.3 and 12.2 mmHg, with limits of agreement of - 15.9 - 7.4 and - 11.1 - 35.6, respectively. The ccNexFin trending abilities were within the suggested limits for mean pressure but insufficient for systolic pressure compared to invasive measurements. Cardiac output had a small bias of 0.2 L/min, but wide limits of agreement of - 2.6 - 3.0. The ccNexFin trending abilities compared to the invasive estimated values (LiDCO) were unsatisfactory.
conclusionsWe consider the ccNexFin monitor to have sufficient accuracy in measuring mean arterial pressure. The limits of agreement for systolic measurements were wider, and the trending ability compared to invasive measurements was outside the recommended limit. The ccNexFin is not reliable for cardiac output measurements or trend in pregnant women for caesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia.
trial registrationRegistered May 23, 2013, at ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01861132 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.