Arno Greyling1, Anke C C M van Mil2, Peter L Zock3, Daniel J Green4, Lorenzo Ghiadoni5, Dick H Thijssen6. 1. Department of Physiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Unilever R&D Vlaardingen, Vlaardingen, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Physiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; TI Food and Nutrition, Wageningen, The Netherlands; Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. Unilever R&D Vlaardingen, Vlaardingen, The Netherlands; TI Food and Nutrition, Wageningen, The Netherlands. 4. School of Sports Science, Exercise and Health, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia. 5. University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. 6. Department of Physiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom. Electronic address: Dick.Thijssen@radboudumc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brachial artery FMD is widely used as a non-invasive measure of endothelial function. Adherence to expert guidelines is believed to be of vital importance to obtain reproducible measurements. We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting on the reproducibility of the FMD in order to determine the relation between adherence to current expert guidelines for FMD measurement and its reproducibility. METHODS: Medline-database was searched through July 2015 and 458 records were screened for FMD reproducibility studies reporting the mean difference and variance of repeated FMD measurements. An adherence score was assigned to each of the included studies based on reported adherence to published guidelines on the assessment of brachial artery FMD. A Typical Error Estimate (TEE) of the FMD was calculated for each included study. The relation between the FMD TEE and the adherence score was investigated by means of Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 48 study groups and 1537 subjects were included in the analyses. The adherence score ranged from 2.4 to 9.2 (out of a maximum of 10) and was strongly and inversely correlated with FMD TEE (adjusted R(2) = 0.36, P < 0.01). Use of automated edge-detection software, continuous diameter measurement, true peak diameter for %FMD calculation, a stereostatic probe holder, and higher age emerged as factors associated with a lower FMD TEE. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that adherence to current expert consensus guidelines and applying contemporary techniques for measuring brachial artery FMD decreases its measurement error.
BACKGROUND:Brachial artery FMD is widely used as a non-invasive measure of endothelial function. Adherence to expert guidelines is believed to be of vital importance to obtain reproducible measurements. We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting on the reproducibility of the FMD in order to determine the relation between adherence to current expert guidelines for FMD measurement and its reproducibility. METHODS: Medline-database was searched through July 2015 and 458 records were screened for FMD reproducibility studies reporting the mean difference and variance of repeated FMD measurements. An adherence score was assigned to each of the included studies based on reported adherence to published guidelines on the assessment of brachial artery FMD. A Typical Error Estimate (TEE) of the FMD was calculated for each included study. The relation between the FMD TEE and the adherence score was investigated by means of Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 48 study groups and 1537 subjects were included in the analyses. The adherence score ranged from 2.4 to 9.2 (out of a maximum of 10) and was strongly and inversely correlated with FMD TEE (adjusted R(2) = 0.36, P < 0.01). Use of automated edge-detection software, continuous diameter measurement, true peak diameter for %FMD calculation, a stereostatic probe holder, and higher age emerged as factors associated with a lower FMD TEE. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that adherence to current expert consensus guidelines and applying contemporary techniques for measuring brachial artery FMD decreases its measurement error.
Authors: H Jonathan Groot; Ryan M Broxterman; Jayson R Gifford; Ryan S Garten; Matthew J Rossman; Catherine L Jarrett; Oh Sung Kwon; Jay R Hydren; Russell S Richardson Journal: Exp Physiol Date: 2022-04-05 Impact factor: 2.858
Authors: Sharine Wittkopp; Fen Wu; Joseph Windheim; Morgan Robinson; Kurunthachalam Kannan; Stuart D Katz; Yu Chen; Jonathan D Newman Journal: Environ Res Date: 2022-04-18 Impact factor: 8.431
Authors: Ryan M Broxterman; Melissa A Witman; Joel D Trinity; H Jonathan Groot; Matthew J Rossman; Song-Young Park; Simon Malenfant; Jayson R Gifford; Oh Sung Kwon; Soung Hun Park; Catherine L Jarrett; Katherine L Shields; Jay R Hydren; Angela V Bisconti; Theophilus Owan; Anu Abraham; Anwar Tandar; Charles Y Lui; Brigham R Smith; Russell S Richardson Journal: Hypertension Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Sandra A Billinger; Jason-Flor V Sisante; Alicen A Whitaker; Michael G Abraham Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Jacqueline K Limberg; Darren P Casey; Joel D Trinity; Wayne T Nicholson; D Walter Wray; Michael E Tschakovsky; Daniel J Green; Ylva Hellsten; Paul J Fadel; Michael J Joyner; Jaume Padilla Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: G P T Areas; A Mazzuco; F R Caruso; R B Jaenisch; R Cabiddu; S A Phillips; R Arena; A Borghi-Silva Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.214
Authors: Joel D Trinity; Jesse C Craig; Caitlin C Fermoyle; Alec I McKenzie; Matthew T Lewis; Soung Hun Park; Matthew T Rondina; Russell S Richardson Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2021-05-18