Literature DB >> 12181146

Comparison of generalized and gender-specific transfer functions for the derivation of aortic waveforms.

Sarah A Hope1, David B Tay, Ian T Meredith, James D Cameron.   

Abstract

Arterial transfer functions have been promoted for the derivation of central aortic waveform characteristics not usually accessible noninvasively, but possibly of prognostic significance. The utility of generalized rather than gender-specific transfer functions has not been assessed. Invasive central aortic and noninvasive radial (Millar Mikro-tip tonometer) blood pressure waveforms were recorded simultaneously in 78 subjects (61 male and 17 female). Average transfer functions were obtained for the whole group and for each gender by two methods. Reverse transformation was performed with the use of each transfer function. Measured aortic waveform parameters were compared with those derived using average, gender-appropriate, and gender-inappropriate transfer functions. Differences in central waveform characteristics were demonstrated between men and women. Derived waveform parameters were significantly different from measured values [e.g., subendocardial viability index and augmentation index (P < 0.001)]. A gender-appropriate transfer function significantly improved the derivation of some parameters, including systolic pressure and systolic and diastolic pressure time integrals (P < 0.05). Generalized arterial transfer functions may not be universally applicable across all waveform parameters of potential interest, and gender-specific transfer functions may be more appropriate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12181146     DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.00216.2002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol        ISSN: 0363-6135            Impact factor:   4.733


  8 in total

1.  Distal shift of arterial pressure wave reflection sites with aging.

Authors:  Jun Sugawara; Koichiro Hayashi; Hirofumi Tanaka
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 2.  Arterial stiffness or endothelial dysfunction as a surrogate marker of vascular risk.

Authors:  Todd J Anderson
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 5.223

Review 3.  Measuring endothelial function.

Authors:  Christopher J Lockhart; Gary E McVeigh; Jay N Cohn
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.810

Review 4.  The Role of Central Blood Pressure Monitoring in the Management of Hypertension.

Authors:  Adrian Ochoa; Gabriel Patarroyo-Aponte; Mahboob Rahman
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  Non-invasive measurement of local pulse pressure by pulse wave-based ultrasound manometry (PWUM).

Authors:  J Vappou; J Luo; K Okajima; M Di Tullio; E E Konofagou
Journal:  Physiol Meas       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 2.833

6.  Contribution of arterial stiffness and stroke volume to peripheral pulse pressure in ICU patients: an arterial tonometry study.

Authors:  Bouchra Lamia; Jean-Louis Teboul; Xavier Monnet; David Osman; Julien Maizel; Christian Richard; Denis Chemla
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Longitudinal Effects of Cigarette Smoking and Smoking Cessation on Aortic Wave Reflections, Pulse Wave Velocity, and Carotid Artery Distensibility.

Authors:  Kelly M T Schmidt; Kristin M Hansen; Adrienne L Johnson; Adam D Gepner; Claudia E Korcarz; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker; Megan E Piper; James H Stein
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 5.501

8.  Comparison of ambulatory central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness in patients with diabetic and non-diabetic CKD.

Authors:  Charalampos Loutradis; Maria Schoina; Theodoros Dimitroulas; Michael Doumas; Alexandros Garyfallos; Asterios Karagiannis; Aikaterini Papagianni; Pantelis Sarafidis
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 3.738

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.