Evaluation of Central Blood Pressure in an Asian Population: Comparison between Brachial Oscillometry and Radial Tonometry Methods.

IF 7.3 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Pulse Pub Date : 2018-07-01 Epub Date: 2018-05-23 DOI:10.1159/000484442
Satoshi Hoshide, Takahiro Komori, Yukiyo Ogata, Kazuo Eguchi, Kazuomi Kario
{"title":"Evaluation of Central Blood Pressure in an Asian Population: Comparison between Brachial Oscillometry and Radial Tonometry Methods.","authors":"Satoshi Hoshide,&nbsp;Takahiro Komori,&nbsp;Yukiyo Ogata,&nbsp;Kazuo Eguchi,&nbsp;Kazuomi Kario","doi":"10.1159/000484442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New devices have recently been developed using various features of the waveform derived from a brachial cuff for noninvasive estimation of central systolic blood pressure (SBP). Central SBP estimated from brachial oscillometry has never been compared with that estimated from radial tonometry in a Japanese population.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>We recruited 155 Japanese volunteers (mean age 58 ± 16 years, range 18-99 years; 66.5$ women) and estimated their central SBP using brachial oscillometry (Mobil-O-Graph) or radial tonometry (SphygmoCor).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean (standard deviation) peripheral SBP and central SBP measured with brachial oscillometry was 128 ± 18 mm Hg and 118 ± 16 mm Hg, respectively, while the central SBP estimated using radial tonometry was 119 ± 18 mm Hg. The mean (standard deviation) difference in estimated central SBP between brachial oscillometry and radial tonometry was 0.36 ± 5.9 mm Hg, and the central SBPs estimated using these devices were strongly correlated (<i>r</i> = 0.946, intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.940, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Central SBP estimated using brachial oscillometry was similar to that estimated from radial tonometry in a Japanese population.</p>","PeriodicalId":29774,"journal":{"name":"Pulse","volume":"6 1-2","pages":"98-102"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000484442","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000484442","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: New devices have recently been developed using various features of the waveform derived from a brachial cuff for noninvasive estimation of central systolic blood pressure (SBP). Central SBP estimated from brachial oscillometry has never been compared with that estimated from radial tonometry in a Japanese population.

Subjects and methods: We recruited 155 Japanese volunteers (mean age 58 ± 16 years, range 18-99 years; 66.5$ women) and estimated their central SBP using brachial oscillometry (Mobil-O-Graph) or radial tonometry (SphygmoCor).

Results: The mean (standard deviation) peripheral SBP and central SBP measured with brachial oscillometry was 128 ± 18 mm Hg and 118 ± 16 mm Hg, respectively, while the central SBP estimated using radial tonometry was 119 ± 18 mm Hg. The mean (standard deviation) difference in estimated central SBP between brachial oscillometry and radial tonometry was 0.36 ± 5.9 mm Hg, and the central SBPs estimated using these devices were strongly correlated (r = 0.946, intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.940, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Central SBP estimated using brachial oscillometry was similar to that estimated from radial tonometry in a Japanese population.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

亚洲人群中心血压的评估:肱振荡测量法和径向血压计方法的比较。
背景:最近已经开发出新的设备,利用来自肱袖带的波形的各种特征来无创地估计中央收缩压(SBP)。在日本人群中,通过肱振荡测量法估计的中央收缩压从未与通过径向血压计估计的进行过比较。对象和方法:我们招募了155名日本志愿者(平均年龄58±16岁,年龄范围18-99岁;66.5美元(女性),并使用肱振荡测量法(mobilo - graph)或径向血压计(sphygmoor)估计其中央收缩压。结果:肱血压计测得的外周收缩压和中枢收缩压均值(标准差)分别为128±18 mm Hg和118±16 mm Hg,而径向血压计测得的中枢收缩压均值(标准差)分别为119±18 mm Hg。肱血压计和径向血压计测得的中枢收缩压均值(标准差)差为0.36±5.9 mm Hg,两种仪器测得的中枢收缩压具有强相关性(r = 0.946,类内相关系数= 0.940)。P < 0.001)。结论:在日本人群中,用肱动脉振荡测量法估计的中央收缩压与用桡动脉血压计估计的相似。
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
4.50%
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信