Supplementary Material for: Direct Determination rather than Oscillometric Estimation of Systolic Blood Pressure in Patients with Severe Chronic Kidney Disease
datasetposted on 12.01.2022, 12:27 by Benmira A.M., Moranne O., Prelipcean C., Pambrun E., Dauzat M., Demattei C., Pérez-Martin A.
Introduction: Although arterial hypertension is a major concern in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), obtaining accurate systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurement is challenging in this population for whom automatic oscillometric devices may yield erroneous results. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 89 patients with stages 4, 5, and 5D CKD, for whom we compared SBP values obtained by the recently described systolic foot-to-apex time interval (SFATI) technique which provides direct SBP determination, the standard technique (Korotkoff sounds), and oscillometry. We investigated the effects of age, sex, diabetes, CKD stage, and pulse pressure to explain measurement errors defined as biases or misclassification relative to the SBP thresholds of 110–130-mm Hg. Results: All 3 techniques showed satisfactory reproducibility for SBP measurement (CCC > 0.84 and >0.91, respectively, in dialyzed and nondialyzed patients). The mean ± SD from SBP as determined via Korotkoff sounds was 1.7 ± 4.6 mm Hg for SFATI (CCC = 0.98) and 5.9 ± 9.3 mm Hg for oscillometry (CCC = 0.88). Referring to the 110–130-mm Hg SBP range outside which treatment prescription or adaptation is recommended for CKD patients, SFATI underestimated SBP in 3 patients and overestimated it in 1, whereas oscillometry underestimated SBP in 12 patients and overestimated it in 3. Higher pulse pressure was the main explanatory factor for measurement and classification errors. Discussion/Conclusion: SFATI provides accurate SBP measurements in patients with severe CKD and paves the way for the standardization of automated noninvasive blood pressure measurement devices. Before prescribing or adjusting antihypertensive therapy, physicians should be aware of the risk of misclassification when using oscillometry.