| Literature DB >> 31275406 |
Yi-Chia Huang1,2, Yu-Hsin Chang3, Shu-Meng Cheng4, Sunny Jui-Shan Lin1,2,5,6, Chien-Jung Lin2, Yi-Chang Su1,6,7.
Abstract
Not all patients with angina pectoris have coronary artery stenosis. To facilitate the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD), we sought to identify predictive factors of pulse spectrum analysis, which was developed by Wang and is one technique of modern pulse diagnosis. The patients suffered from chest pain and received cardiac catheterization to confirm the CAD diagnosis and Gensini score were recruited. Their pulse waves of radial artery were recorded. Then, by performing a fast Fourier transform, 10 amplitude values of frequency spectrum harmonics were obtained. Each harmonic amplitude was divided by the sum of all harmonic amplitude values, obtaining the relative percentages of 10 harmonics (C1-C10). Subsequently, multivariate logistic regression was conducted with two models and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) of these 2 models were compared to see if combining the pulse diagnosis parameters with the risk factor of CAD can increase the prediction rate of CAD diagnosis. The predictive factors of CAD severity were analyzed by multivariate linear regression. A total of 83 participants were included; 63 were diagnosed CAD and 20 without CAD. In the CAD group, C1 was greater and C5 was lower than those of the non-CAD group. The CAD risk factors were put alone in Model 1 to perform the multivariate logistic regression analysis which had a prediction rate of 77.1%; while putting the C1 and C5 harmonics together with the risk factors into Model 2, the prediction rate increased to 80.7%. Finally, the area under ROC of Model 1 and Model 2 was 0.788 and 0.856, respectively. Furthermore, left C1, left C5, gender, and presence of hyperlipidemia were predictors of CAD severity. Therefore, pulse spectrum analysis may be a tool to facilitate CAD diagnosis before receiving cardiac catheterization. The harmonics C1 and C5 were favorable predictive indicators.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31275406 PMCID: PMC6582909 DOI: 10.1155/2019/2709486
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Demographic features of patients with and without coronary artery disease.
| Variable | CAD | Non-CAD |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| (n=63) | (n=20) | ||
| Gender (male: n, %) | 52(82.5%) | 14(70.0%) | NS |
| Age (yr) | 59.77±10.51 | 50.68±12.64 | <0.01 |
| Height (cm) | 166.31±8.09 | 167.40±7.73 | NS |
| Weight (kg) | 71.45±12.04 | 76.75±15.62 | NS |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 25.81±3.75 | 27.23±4.17 | NS |
| Comorbidity | |||
| Hypertension (n, %) | 42(66.7%) | 10(50.0%) | NS |
| Diabetes (n, %) | 17(27.0%) | 2(10.0%) | NS |
| Hyperlipidemia (n, %) | 23(36.5%) | 7(35.0%) | NS |
| SBP (mmHg) | 135.19±15.10 | 135.60±21.77 | NS |
| DBP (mmHg) | 80.89±9.91 | 82.25±10.03 | NS |
| FPG (mg/dl) | 153.14±60.53(57) | 124.88±35.96(17) | NS |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 171.45±43.16(56) | 155.94±22.64(16) | NS |
| TG (mg/dl) | 142.31±65.21(61) | 127.61±66.66(18) | NS |
| LDL (mg/dl) | 115.96±42.56(57) | 101.69±24.99(16) | NS |
(i) Continuous data are presented as mean ± SD.
(ii) Categorical data are presented as number of patients (percentages).
(iii) For FPG, total cholesterol, LDL, and TG, the number of people examined is indicated in parentheses.
(iv) P < 0.05: being statistically significant.
(v) NS: not significant.
(vi) BMI: body mass index = Weight (kg)/ Height2 (m)
(vii) CAD: coronary artery disease; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; FPG: fasting plasma glucose; TG: triglyceride; and LDL: low density lipoprotein.
Comparison of relative percentages of the harmonics in the radial artery pulse of both arms of patients with and without CAD.
| CAD(n=63) | Non-CAD(n=20) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Left | Right |
| Left | Right |
| |
| C1 | 52.04±6.93 | 50.38±7.24 | NS | 48.03±6.04 | 46.33±4.86 | NS |
| C2 | 28.56±5.91 | 27.78±5.54 | NS | 28.42±7.29 | 26.61±4.21 | NS |
| C3 | 17.34±5.33 | 17.06±4.68 | NS | 17.10±5.50 | 16.44±3.38 | NS |
| C4 | 8.78±3.96 | 8.58±3.60 | NS | 8.78±3.94 | 8.62±2.84 | NS |
| C5 | 6.12±2.53 | 6.10±2.11 | NS | 8.02±3.24 | 7.70±2.22 | NS |
| C6 | 5.17±1.94 | 5.57±2.06 | NS | 6.40±2.65 | 6.49±2.48 | NS |
| C7 | 3.65±2.03 | 3.95±1.95 | NS | 3.93±1.98 | 4.20±2.08 | NS |
| C8 | 2.43±1.48 | 2.58±1.47 | NS | 2.56±1.28 | 2.74±1.25 | NS |
| C9 | 1.73±1.13 | 1.92±1.01 | NS | 2.12±1.12 | 2.28±0.84 | NS |
| C10 | 1.37±0.73 | 1.54±0.82 | NS | 1.60±0.97 | 1.83±0.77 | NS |
(i) Continuous data are presented as mean ± SD.
(ii) Values have been calculated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
(iii) P < 0.05: being statistically significant.
(iv) NS: not significant.
Comparison of relative percentages of the harmonics in the radial artery pulse in patients with and without CAD.
| Left radial artery pulse | Right radial artery pulse | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAD (%) | Non-CAD (%) |
| CAD (%) | Non-CAD (%) |
| |
| C1 | 52.04±6.93 | 48.03±6.04 | <0.01 | 50.38±7.24 | 46.33±4.86 | 0.01 |
| C2 | 28.56±5.91 | 28.42±7.29 | NS | 27.78±5.54 | 26.61±4.21 | NS |
| C3 | 17.34±5.33 | 17.10±5.50 | NS | 17.06±4.68 | 16.44±3.38 | NS |
| C4 | 8.78±3.96 | 8.78±3.94 | NS | 8.58±3.60 | 8.62±2.84 | NS |
| C5 | 6.12±2.53 | 8.02±3.24 | <0.01 | 6.10±2.11 | 7.70±2.22 | 0.02 |
| C6 | 5.17±1.94 | 6.40±2.65 | NS | 5.57±2.06 | 6.49±2.48 | NS |
| C7 | 3.65±2.03 | 3.93±1.98 | NS | 3.95±1.95 | 4.20±2.08 | NS |
| C8 | 2.43±1.48 | 2.56±1.28 | NS | 2.58±1.47 | 2.74±1.25 | NS |
| C9 | 1.73±1.13 | 2.12±1.12 | NS | 1.92±1.01 | 2.28±0.84 | NS |
| C10 | 1.37±0.73 | 1.60±0.97 | NS | 1.54±0.82 | 1.83±0.77 | NS |
(i) Continuous data are presented as mean ± SD.
(ii) Values have been calculated using Mann–Whitney U test.
(iii) P < 0.05: being statistically significant.
(iv) NS: not significant.
Multivariate analysis of influence factors for coronary artery disease.
| Prediction rate: 77.1% | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | B | Wald | Relative risk | 95% CI |
|
| Age | 0.07 | 6.14 | 1.07 | 1.01-1.13 | <0.05 |
| Gender | 1.37 | 3.84 | 3.94 | 1.00-15.52 | 0.05 |
| BMI | -0.10 | 1.50 | 0.91 | 0.78-1.06 | NS |
| Hypertension | 0.57 | 0.81 | 1.77 | 0.51-6.16 | NS |
| Diabetes | 1.06 | 1.44 | 2.89 | 0.51-16.37 | NS |
| Hyperlipidemia | 0.25 | 0.15 | 1.28 | 0.37-4.49 | NS |
(i) Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed by “enter” method.
(ii) P < 0.05: being statistically significant.
(iii) NS: not significant.
(iv) CI: confidence interval.
Multivariate analysis of relative spectral energy values and influence factors for coronary artery disease.
| Prediction rate: 79.5% | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | B | Wald | Relative risk | 95% CI |
|
| Age | -0.002 | 0.004 | 1.00 | 0.93-1.07 | NS |
| Gender | 1.57 | 3.99 | 4.80 | 1.03-22.40 | <0.05 |
| BMI | -0.06 | 0.51 | 0.94 | 0.80-1.11 | NS |
| Hypertension | 0.61 | 0.66 | 1.84 | 0.42-7.99 | NS |
| Diabetes | 1.59 | 1.93 | 4.93 | 0.52-46.59 | NS |
| Hyperlipidemia | 0.21 | 0.08 | 1.23 | 0.30-5.10 | NS |
| Right C1 | 0.10 | 1.88 | 1.11 | 0.96-1.28 | NS |
| Right C5 | -0.22 | 1.55 | 0.80 | 0.57-1.14 | NS |
| Left C1 | 0.09 | 1.17 | 1.09 | 0.93-1.28 | NS |
| Left C5 | -0.34 | 5.12 | 0.71 | 0.53-0.96 | <0.05 |
(i) Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed by “enter” method.
(ii) P <0.05: being statistically significant.
(iii) NS: not significant.
(iv) CI: confidence interval.
Linear regression analysis of relative spectral energy values and influence factors for the severity of coronary artery disease.
| Variable | B | t |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | -0.28 | -0.80 | NS |
| Gender | 24.26 | 2.96 | <0.01 |
| BMI | -0.35 | -0.39 | NS |
| Hypertension | 0.04 | 0.01 | NS |
| Diabetes | 14.58 | 1.90 | NS |
| Hyperlipidemia | 15.14 | 2.26 | 0.03 |
| Right C1 | 0.84 | 1.45 | NS |
| Right C5 | 0.16 | 0.10 | NS |
| Left C1 | 1.76 | 3.00 | <0.01 |
| Left C5 | -3.98 | -3.05 | <0.01 |
(i) Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed by “enter” method.
(ii) The severity was
(iii) P <0.05: being statistically significant.
(iv) NS: not significant.
Figure 2Receiver operator curves (ROC) comparing Model 1 (influence factors: age, gender, BMI, hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia) with Model 2 (influence factors and relative spectral energy values) for predicting coronary artery disease. Area under curve (AUC) of Model 1 and Model 2 is 0.788 and 0.856, respectively.