Impact of a cuff-based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Daniel Bia, Federico Salazar, Luis Cinca, Marcos Gutierrez, Álvaro Facta, Alejandro Diaz, Yanina Zócalo
{"title":"Impact of a cuff-based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure","authors":"Daniel Bia,&nbsp;Federico Salazar,&nbsp;Luis Cinca,&nbsp;Marcos Gutierrez,&nbsp;Álvaro Facta,&nbsp;Alejandro Diaz,&nbsp;Yanina Zócalo","doi":"10.1111/cpf.12869","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Brachial cuff-based methods are increasingly used to estimate aortic systolic blood pressure (aoSBP). However, there are several unresolved issues.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>to determine to what extent the scheme used to calibrate brachial records (1) can affect noninvasive obtained aoSBP levels, and consequently, the level of agreement with the aoSBP recorded invasively, and (2) how different ways of calibrating ultimately impact the relationship between aoSBP and cardiac properties.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>brachial and aortic blood pressure (BP) was simultaneously obtained by invasive (catheterisation) and noninvasive (brachial oscillometric-device) methods (89 subjects). aoSBP was noninvasive obtained using three calibration schemes: ‘SD’: diastolic and systolic brachial BP, ‘C’: diastolic and calculated brachial mean BP (bMBP), ‘Osc’: diastolic and oscillometry-derived bMBP. Agreement between invasive and noninvasive aoSBP, and associations between BP and echocardiographic-derived parameters were analysed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>‘C’ and ‘SD’ schemes generated aoSBP levels lower than those recorded invasively (mean errors: 6.9 and 10.1 mmHg); the opposite was found when considering ‘Osc’(mean error: −11.4 mmHg). As individuals had higher invasive aoSBP, the three calibration schemes increasingly underestimated aoSBP levels; and viceversa. The ‘range’ of invasive aoSBP in which the calibration schemes reach the lowest error level (−5–5 mmHg) is different: ‘C’: 103–131 mmHg; ‘Osc’: 159–201 mmHg; ‘SD’:101-124 mmHg. The calibration methods allowed reaching levels of association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics, somewhat lower, but very similar to those obtained when considering invasive aoSBP. There is no evidence of a clear superiority of one calibration method over another when considering the association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10504,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cpf.12869","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Brachial cuff-based methods are increasingly used to estimate aortic systolic blood pressure (aoSBP). However, there are several unresolved issues.

Aims

to determine to what extent the scheme used to calibrate brachial records (1) can affect noninvasive obtained aoSBP levels, and consequently, the level of agreement with the aoSBP recorded invasively, and (2) how different ways of calibrating ultimately impact the relationship between aoSBP and cardiac properties.

Methods

brachial and aortic blood pressure (BP) was simultaneously obtained by invasive (catheterisation) and noninvasive (brachial oscillometric-device) methods (89 subjects). aoSBP was noninvasive obtained using three calibration schemes: ‘SD’: diastolic and systolic brachial BP, ‘C’: diastolic and calculated brachial mean BP (bMBP), ‘Osc’: diastolic and oscillometry-derived bMBP. Agreement between invasive and noninvasive aoSBP, and associations between BP and echocardiographic-derived parameters were analysed.

Conclusions

‘C’ and ‘SD’ schemes generated aoSBP levels lower than those recorded invasively (mean errors: 6.9 and 10.1 mmHg); the opposite was found when considering ‘Osc’(mean error: −11.4 mmHg). As individuals had higher invasive aoSBP, the three calibration schemes increasingly underestimated aoSBP levels; and viceversa. The ‘range’ of invasive aoSBP in which the calibration schemes reach the lowest error level (−5–5 mmHg) is different: ‘C’: 103–131 mmHg; ‘Osc’: 159–201 mmHg; ‘SD’:101-124 mmHg. The calibration methods allowed reaching levels of association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics, somewhat lower, but very similar to those obtained when considering invasive aoSBP. There is no evidence of a clear superiority of one calibration method over another when considering the association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics.

基于袖带的装置校准方法对有创与无创主动脉和肱动脉压力一致性的影响。
基于肱袖带的方法越来越多地用于估计主动脉收缩压(aoSBP)。然而,仍有几个未解决的问题。目的:确定用于校准肱动脉记录的方案在多大程度上(i)可以影响无创获得的aoSBP水平,从而影响与有创记录的aoSBP的一致程度,以及(ii)不同的校准方法最终如何影响aoSBP与心脏特性之间的关系。方法:89例受试者采用有创(导管)和无创(肱动脉示波仪)方法同时测量肱动脉和主动脉血压(BP)。aoSBP采用三种校准方案无创获得:“SD”:舒张和收缩期肱BP,“C”:舒张和计算肱平均BP (bMBP),“Osc”:舒张和振荡测量得出的bMBP。分析有创和无创aoSBP之间的一致性,以及BP与超声心动图衍生参数之间的相关性。结论:“C”和“SD”方案产生的aoSBP水平低于有创记录(平均误差:6.9和10.1 mmHg);当考虑“Osc”时,结果正好相反(平均误差:-11.4 mmHg)。随着个体侵入性aoSBP的升高,三种定标方案对aoSBP水平的低估程度越来越低;,反之亦然。各校准方案达到最低误差水平(-5 ~ 5 mmHg)的有创aoSBP“范围”不同:“C”:103 ~ 131 mmHg;' Osc ': 159-201 mmHg;´SD´:101 - 124毫米汞柱。校准方法允许达到aoSBP与心脏特征之间的关联水平,稍微低一些,但与考虑有创性aoSBP时获得的关联水平非常相似。在考虑aoSBP与心脏特征之间的关系时,没有证据表明一种校准方法明显优于另一种校准方法。这篇文章受版权保护。版权所有。
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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging publishes reports on clinical and experimental research pertinent to human physiology in health and disease. The scope of the Journal is very broad, covering all aspects of the regulatory system in the cardiovascular, renal and pulmonary systems with special emphasis on methodological aspects. The focus for the journal is, however, work that has potential clinical relevance. The Journal also features review articles on recent front-line research within these fields of interest. Covered by the major abstracting services including Current Contents and Science Citation Index, Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging plays an important role in providing effective and productive communication among clinical physiologists world-wide.
×
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