Hydrostatic Pressure Compensator for Evaluation of Carotid Stiffness using A-Mode Ultrasound: Design, Characterization, and In-Vivo Validation

S. Ishwarya, Rahul Manoj, V. RajKiran, P. Nabeel, J. Joseph
{"title":"Hydrostatic Pressure Compensator for Evaluation of Carotid Stiffness using A-Mode Ultrasound: Design, Characterization, and In-Vivo Validation","authors":"S. Ishwarya, Rahul Manoj, V. RajKiran, P. Nabeel, J. Joseph","doi":"10.1109/MeMeA54994.2022.9856537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Arterial stiffness measured from central arteries is widely recognized as a prognostic marker for cardiovascular risk stratification. Measurements in sitting posture make stiffness assessment potentially more rapid and feasible for large-scale population-level field screening. However, the blood pressure (BP) required for stiffness evaluation must be compensated for any hydrostatic pressure offset while performing measurements in a sitting posture. In this work, we developed and validated a hydrostatic pressure compensation unit integrated with our A-mode ultrasound device for carotid artery stiffness. The system was characterized, and its design parameters were carefully considered for concurrence with a physiologically interesting range. The smallest change it could reliably measure was 2 mm, which corresponded to 0.3 mmHg of blood pressure. The device was validated on 20 human subjects (11 males and 9 females). The results demonstrated that the average carotid systolic and diastolic pressures compensated with the hydrostatic pressure were 29% and 22% lesser than those without compensation. The ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference ($\\mathrm{p} < 0.0001$) between the $\\beta$ obtained from compensated ($5.21\\ \\pm\\ 0.43$) and uncompensated ($5.73\\ \\pm\\ 0.22$) pressures. Whereas Ep, AC did not show a statistically significant difference as they rely on the pulse pressure, which was not affected by the hydrostatic pressure correction. Conclusively, hydrostatic pressure affects the stiffness markers that rely on the absolute pressure values.","PeriodicalId":106228,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA)","volume":"156 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/MeMeA54994.2022.9856537","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Arterial stiffness measured from central arteries is widely recognized as a prognostic marker for cardiovascular risk stratification. Measurements in sitting posture make stiffness assessment potentially more rapid and feasible for large-scale population-level field screening. However, the blood pressure (BP) required for stiffness evaluation must be compensated for any hydrostatic pressure offset while performing measurements in a sitting posture. In this work, we developed and validated a hydrostatic pressure compensation unit integrated with our A-mode ultrasound device for carotid artery stiffness. The system was characterized, and its design parameters were carefully considered for concurrence with a physiologically interesting range. The smallest change it could reliably measure was 2 mm, which corresponded to 0.3 mmHg of blood pressure. The device was validated on 20 human subjects (11 males and 9 females). The results demonstrated that the average carotid systolic and diastolic pressures compensated with the hydrostatic pressure were 29% and 22% lesser than those without compensation. The ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference ($\mathrm{p} < 0.0001$) between the $\beta$ obtained from compensated ($5.21\ \pm\ 0.43$) and uncompensated ($5.73\ \pm\ 0.22$) pressures. Whereas Ep, AC did not show a statistically significant difference as they rely on the pulse pressure, which was not affected by the hydrostatic pressure correction. Conclusively, hydrostatic pressure affects the stiffness markers that rely on the absolute pressure values.
用a型超声评估颈动脉硬度的静水压补偿器:设计、表征和体内验证
从中心动脉测量动脉硬度被广泛认为是心血管危险分层的预后标志。坐姿的测量使得刚度评估在大规模人群水平的现场筛查中可能更加快速和可行。然而,在坐姿测量时,刚度评估所需的血压(BP)必须补偿任何静水压力偏移。在这项工作中,我们开发并验证了与我们的颈动脉僵硬a型超声设备集成的静液压力补偿单元。对该系统进行了表征,并仔细考虑了其设计参数,以符合生理学上有趣的范围。它能可靠测量的最小变化是2毫米,相当于0.3毫米汞柱的血压。该装置在20名人类受试者(11名男性和9名女性)身上进行了验证。结果表明,经静水压力补偿后的颈动脉平均收缩压和舒张压分别比未补偿组低29%和22%。方差分析显示,从补偿(5.21\ \pm\ 0.43$)和未补偿(5.73\ \pm\ 0.22$)压力中获得的$\beta$之间存在统计学显著差异($\ mathm {p} < 0.0001$)。而Ep、AC没有显示出统计学上的显著差异,因为它们依赖于脉冲压力,而脉冲压力不受静水压力校正的影响。最后,静水压力影响依赖于绝对压力值的刚度指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信