These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Patient-specific non-invasive estimation of the aortic blood pressure waveform by ultrasound and tonometry.
    Author: Zhou S, Xu K, Fang Y, Alastruey J, Vennin S, Yang J, Wang J, Xu L, Wang X, Greenwald SE.
    Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2024 Apr; 247():108082. PubMed ID: 38422893.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Aortic blood pressure (ABP) is a more effective prognostic indicator of cardiovascular disease than peripheral blood pressure. A highly accurate algorithm for non-invasively deriving the ABP wave, based on ultrasonic measurement of aortic flow combined with peripheral pulse wave measurements, has been proposed elsewhere. However, it has remained at the proof-of-concept stage because it requires a priori knowledge of the ABP waveform to calculate aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV). The objective of this study is to transform this proof-of-concept algorithm into a clinically feasible technique. METHODS: We used the Bramwell-Hill equation to non-invasively calculate aortic PWV which was then used to reconstruct the ABP waveform from non-invasively determined aortic blood flow velocity, aortic diameter, and radial pressure. The two aortic variables were acquired by an ultrasound system from 90 subjects, followed by recordings of radial pressure using a SphygmoCor device. The ABPs estimated by the new algorithm were compared with reference values obtained by cardiac catheterization (invasive validation, 8 subjects aged 62.3 ± 12.7 years) and a SphygmoCor device (non-invasive validation, 82 subjects aged 45.0 ± 17.8 years). RESULTS: In the invasive comparison, there was good agreement between the estimated and directly measured pressures: the mean error in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 1.4 ± 0.8 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure (DBP), 0.9 ± 0.8 mmHg; mean blood pressure (MBP), 1.8 ± 1.2 mmHg and pulse pressure (PP), 1.4 ± 1.1 mmHg. In the non-invasive comparison, the estimated and directly measured pressures also agreed well: the errors being: SBP, 2.0 ± 1.4 mmHg; DBP, 0.8 ± 0.1 mmHg; MBP, 0.1 ± 0.1 mmHg and PP, 2.3 ± 1.6 mmHg. The significance of the differences in mean errors between calculated and reference values for SBP, DBP, MBP and PP were assessed by paired t-tests. The agreement between the reference methods and those obtained by applying the new approach was also expressed by correlation and Bland-Altman plots. CONCLUSION: The new method proposed here can accurately estimate ABP, allowing this important variable to be obtained non-invasively, using standard, well validated measurement techniques. It thus has the potential to relocate ABP estimation from a research environment to more routine use in the cardiac clinic. SHORT ABSTRACT: A highly accurate algorithm for non-invasively deriving the ABP wave has been proposed elsewhere. However, it has remained at the proof-of-concept stage because it requires a priori knowledge of the ABP waveform to calculate aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV). This study aims to transform this proof-of-concept algorithm into a clinically feasible technique. We used the Bramwell-Hill equation to non-invasively calculate aortic PWV which was then used to reconstruct the ABP waveform. The ABPs estimated by the new algorithm were compared with reference values obtained by cardiac catheterization or a SphygmoCor device. The results showed that there was good agreement between the estimated and directly measured pressures. The new method proposed can accurately estimate ABP, allowing this important variable to be obtained non-invasively, using standard, well validated measurement techniques. It thus has the potential to relocate ABP estimation from a research environment to more routine use in the cardiac clinic.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]