Francesco Stea1, Erwan Bozec, Sandrine Millasseau, Hakim Khettab, Pierre Boutouyrie, Stéphane Laurent. 1. aInternal Medicine Department, Pisa University bIstituto di Fisiologia Clinica Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Pisa, Italy cInserm U970, Université Paris Descartes, Assistance Publique hôpitaux de Paris, Paris dPulse Wave Consulting, Saint Leu la Foret, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Complior device (Alam Medical, France) was used in epidemiological studies which established pulse wave velocity (PWV) as a cardiovascular risk marker. Central pressure is related, but complementary to PWV and also associated to cardiovascular outcomes. The new Complior Analyse measures both PWV and central blood pressure during the same acquisition. The aim of this study was to compare PWV values from Complior Analyse with the previous Complior SP (PWVcs) and with Sphygmocor (PWVscr; AtCor, Australia), and to compare central systolic pressure from Complior Analyse and Sphygmocor. METHOD: Peripheral and central pressures and PWV were measured with the three devices in 112 patients. PWV measurements from Complior Analyse were analysed using two foot-detection algorithms (PWVca_it and PWVca_cs). Both radial (ao-SBPscr) and carotid (car-SBPscr) approaches from Sphygmocor were compared to carotid Complior Analyse measurements (car-SBPca). The same distance and same calibrating pressures were used for all devices. RESULTS: PWVca_it was strongly correlated to PWVscr (R(2) = 0.93, P < 0.001) with a difference of 0.0 ± 0.7 m/s. PWVca_cs was also correlated to PWVcs (R(2) = 0.90, P < 0.001) with a difference of 0.1 ± 0.7 m/s. Central systolic pressures were strongly correlated. The difference between car-SBPca and ao-SBPscr was 3.1 ± 4.2 mmHg (P < 0.001), statistically equivalent to the difference between car-SBPscr and ao-SBPscr (3.9 ± 5.8 mmHg, P < 0.001), whilst the difference between car-SBPca and car-SBPscr was negligible (-0.7 ± 5.6 mmHg, P = NS). CONCLUSION: The new Complior Analyse device provides equivalent results for PWV and central pressure values to the Sphygmocor and Complior SP. It reaches Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation standard for central blood pressure and grades as excellent for PWV on the Artery Society criteria. It can be interchanged with existing devices.
BACKGROUND: The Complior device (Alam Medical, France) was used in epidemiological studies which established pulse wave velocity (PWV) as a cardiovascular risk marker. Central pressure is related, but complementary to PWV and also associated to cardiovascular outcomes. The new Complior Analyse measures both PWV and central blood pressure during the same acquisition. The aim of this study was to compare PWV values from Complior Analyse with the previous Complior SP (PWVcs) and with Sphygmocor (PWVscr; AtCor, Australia), and to compare central systolic pressure from Complior Analyse and Sphygmocor. METHOD: Peripheral and central pressures and PWV were measured with the three devices in 112 patients. PWV measurements from Complior Analyse were analysed using two foot-detection algorithms (PWVca_it and PWVca_cs). Both radial (ao-SBPscr) and carotid (car-SBPscr) approaches from Sphygmocor were compared to carotid Complior Analyse measurements (car-SBPca). The same distance and same calibrating pressures were used for all devices. RESULTS: PWVca_it was strongly correlated to PWVscr (R(2) = 0.93, P < 0.001) with a difference of 0.0 ± 0.7 m/s. PWVca_cs was also correlated to PWVcs (R(2) = 0.90, P < 0.001) with a difference of 0.1 ± 0.7 m/s. Central systolic pressures were strongly correlated. The difference between car-SBPca and ao-SBPscr was 3.1 ± 4.2 mmHg (P < 0.001), statistically equivalent to the difference between car-SBPscr and ao-SBPscr (3.9 ± 5.8 mmHg, P < 0.001), whilst the difference between car-SBPca and car-SBPscr was negligible (-0.7 ± 5.6 mmHg, P = NS). CONCLUSION: The new Complior Analyse device provides equivalent results for PWV and central pressure values to the Sphygmocor and Complior SP. It reaches Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation standard for central blood pressure and grades as excellent for PWV on the Artery Society criteria. It can be interchanged with existing devices.
Authors: Alberto Lo Gullo; Clemente Giuffrida; Carmela Morace; Giovanni Squadrito; Paola Magnano San Lio; Luisa Ricciardi; Carlo Salvarani; Giuseppe Mandraffino Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-05-12
Authors: Karl Fengler; Karl-Philipp Rommel; Stephan Blazek; Maximilian Von Roeder; Christian Besler; Christian Lücke; Matthias Gutberlet; Jennifer Steeden; Michael Quail; Steffen Desch; Holger Thiele; Vivek Muthurangu; Philipp Lurz Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: David Campo; Hakim Khettab; Roger Yu; Nicolas Genain; Paul Edouard; Nadine Buard; Pierre Boutouyrie Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Hongju Wang; Lu Wang; Nannan Sun; Yang Yao; Liling Hao; Lisheng Xu; Stephen E Greenwald Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Pierre-Yves Courand; Helena Pereira; Costantino Del Giudice; Philippe Gosse; Matthieu Monge; Guillaume Bobrie; Pascal Delsart; Claire Mounier-Vehier; Pierre Lantelme; Thierry Denolle; Caroline Dourmap; Jean Michel Halimi; Xavier Girerd; Patrick Rossignol; Faiez Zannad; Olivier Ormezzano; Bernard Vaisse; Daniel Herpin; Jean Ribstein; Beatrice Bouhanick; Jean-Jacques Mourad; Emile Ferrari; Gilles Chatellier; Marc Sapoval; Arshid Azarine; Michel Azizi Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 5.501