We evaluated the agreement between oscillometric and direct blood pressure monitors in anesthetized dogs and evaluated the ability of the oscillometric method to detect MAP <60 mmHg. Forty client-owned dogs, three months to 14 years old, 4.6–50.2 kg, under general anesthesia were studied. Systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressures were measured directly via an arterial catheter and with an oscillometric cuff (Cardell Touch monitor). Paired values were compared with mixed effect models. Bias and limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. The sensitivity and false negative rate to detect hypotension (invasive MAP <60 mmHg) using an oscillometric MAP <60 and < 70 mmHg were calculated. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was constructed and the area under the curve calculated.

SAP and DAP differed between methods (both P < 0.001), but MAP did not (P = 0.5). Bland-Altman plots showed small biases but wide LOA for all variables. The sensitivity to detect hypotension was 40% with a false negative rate of 60% when using an oscillometric MAP <60 mmHg, and 68% and 32%, respectively, with a MAP <70 mmHg. The area under the ROC curve for MAP was 0.82.

While the oscillometric MAP did not differ from invasive values, the device failed to recognize hypotensive events when 60 mmHg was used as the threshold to detect hypotension. Higher MAP values increased the ability to correctly recognize hypotension, but at the expense of a higher incidence of false positives.

我们评估了麻醉犬的示波法和直接血压监测仪之间的一致性，并评估了示波法检测MAP <60 mmHg的能力。研究了四十只客户拥有的狗，它们在全身麻醉下三个月至14岁，体重为4.6-50.2千克。收缩压（SAP），平均压（MAP）和舒张压（DAP）动脉压直接通过动脉导管和示波袖套（Cardell Touch monitor）进行测量。将配对值与混合效应模型进行比较。计算偏差和协议限制（LOA）。计算使用示波法MAP <60和<70 mmHg检测低血压（侵入性MAP <60 mmHg）的敏感性和假阴性率。构建了接收器工作特性（ROC）曲线，并计算了曲线下的面积。

SAP和DAP的方法不同（均P  <0.001），而MAP没有差异（P  = 0.5）。Bland-Altman图显示所有变量的偏差较小，但LOA较宽。当使用示波法MAP <60 mmHg时，检测低血压的敏感性为40％，假阴性率为60％，而当MAP <70 mmHg时，分别为68％和32％。MAP的ROC曲线下面积为0.82。

虽然示波图MAP与侵入值没有区别，但当60 mmHg用作检测低血压的阈值时，该设备无法识别降压事件。较高的MAP值增加了正确识别低血压的能力，但以较高的误报率为代价。