Artery Research

<Previous Article In Issue
Next Article In Issue>
Volume 20, Issue C, December 2017, Pages 81 - 82

P129 SHORT-TERM REPEATABILITY OF NON-INVASIVE AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY MEASURES

Authors
Andrea Grillo1, Paolo Salvi2, Sandrine Millasseau3, Matteo Rovina4, Corrado Baldi4, Francesco Moretti5, Lucia Salvi6, Andrea Faini2, Renzo Carretta4, Filippo Scalise7, Gianfranco Parati2, 5
1University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy
2Department of Cardiovascular Neural and Metabolic Sciences, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy
3Pulse Wave Consulting, St Leu La Foret, France
4Department of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Italy
5Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
6Department of Internal Medicine and Medical herapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
7Policlinico di Monza, Interventional Cardiology Laboratory, Monza, MB, Italy
Available Online 6 December 2017.
DOI
10.1016/j.artres.2017.10.111How to use a DOI?
Abstract

Objective: To compare the short-term repeatability of aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) measures obtained with non-invasive devices.

Methods: In 102 patients planned to undertake a cardiac catheterization (65±13 years, 70.6% males) duplicate non-invasive measures of PWV, 15-minutes apart, were obtained with 4 devices measuring two-points carotid-femoral PWV and the related pulse transit time (PTT): Complior (AlamMedical), PulsePenETT, PulsePenET (DiaTecne), SphygmoCor (AtCorMedical), and with 2 devices estimating PWV from the oscillometric cuff-derived brachial wave: BPLab (Petr Telegin), Mobil-O-Graph (IEM). PWV and carotid-femoral PTT measurements were compared using coefficients of variation (CV%) and their confidence intervals (CI).

Results: Devices evaluating carotid-femoral PWV showed a good repeatability (CV%[CI]: Complior: 8.8 [7.3–10.1]; PulsePen ETT: 8.0 [6.2–9.5]; PulsePen ET: 5.8 [4.9–6.6]; SphygmoCor: 9.5 [7.7–11.0]), whereas the repeatability of PWV estimated by cuff-based devices was for the BPLab = 5.5 [4.2–6.6] and for the Mobil-O- Graph = 3.4 [2.9–3.8]). A tendency toward a lower repeatability of carotid-femoral PWV was present for greater arterial stiffness, while repeatability of carotid-femoral PTT was not related to its mean values. Differences between repeated PWV measurements were not correlated with blood pressure (R2 = 0.005) or heart rate variations (R2 = 0.013).

Conclusions: Short-term repeatability of PWV measures was good, with some differences between different devices. A greater repeatability was observed in devices estimating PTT from a cuff-based measurement, compared to devices measuring carotid-femoral PTT, owing to the algorithm of calculation of PWV (Mobil-O-Graph) or to the procedure of correction which eliminates highly variable PWV values (BPLab).

Repeatability of PWV is not influenced by blood pressure or heart rate variations. For carotid-femoral PWV, the repeatability of measures is lower for higher PWV values.

Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Download article (PDF)
View full text (HTML)

<Previous Article In Issue
Next Article In Issue>
Journal
Artery Research
Volume-Issue
20 - C
Pages
81 - 82
Publication Date
2017/12/06
ISSN (Online)
1876-4401
ISSN (Print)
1872-9312
DOI
10.1016/j.artres.2017.10.111How to use a DOI?
Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Cite this article

risenwbib
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Andrea Grillo
AU  - Paolo Salvi
AU  - Sandrine Millasseau
AU  - Matteo Rovina
AU  - Corrado Baldi
AU  - Francesco Moretti
AU  - Lucia Salvi
AU  - Andrea Faini
AU  - Renzo Carretta
AU  - Filippo Scalise
AU  - Gianfranco Parati
PY  - 2017
DA  - 2017/12/06
TI  - P129 SHORT-TERM REPEATABILITY OF NON-INVASIVE AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY MEASURES
JO  - Artery Research
SP  - 81
EP  - 82
VL  - 20
IS  - C
SN  - 1876-4401
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2017.10.111
DO  - 10.1016/j.artres.2017.10.111
ID  - Grillo2017
ER  -