Literature DB >> 32762109

Automated pulse wave velocity assessment using a professional oscillometric office blood pressure monitor.

Anastasios Kollias1, Konstantinos G Kyriakoulis1, Areti Gravvani1, Ioannis Anagnostopoulos1, George S Stergiou1.   

Abstract

Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) is the gold standard method for assessing arterial stiffness. This study evaluated automated brachial-ankle PWV (baPWV) taken by a professional oscillometric blood pressure monitor (Microlife WatchBP Office Vascular) versus reference cfPWV (Complior device). Subjects recruited from a hypertension outpatient clinic had duplicate baPWV and cfPWV measurements (randomized crossover design) and carotid ultrasonography. Of 102 subjects recruited, 101 had valid baPWV measurements. Four subjects were excluded and 97 were analyzed (age 58.3 ± 11.4 years, men 70%, hypertensives 76%, diabetics 17%, cardiovascular disease 10%, smokers 23%). The mean difference between baPWV (13.1 ± 1.8 m/s) and cfPWV (9.1 ± 1.8 m/s) was 4.0 ± 1.4 m/s (P < .01) with close association between them (r = 0.70, P < .01). baPWV and cfPWV were correlated with age (r 0.54/0.49 respectively), systolic blood pressure (0.45/0.50), carotid intima-media thickness (0.31/0.44), and carotid distensibility coefficient (-0.47/-0.34) (all P < .05; no difference between the two methods, z test). There was reasonable agreement (77%) between the two methods in identifying subjects at the top quartile of their distributions (kappa 0.39, P < .01). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the identification of carotid plaques were comparable for cfPWV and baPWV (0.79 and 0.74 respectively, P = NS). Automated baPWV measurement by a professional oscillometric blood pressure monitor is feasible and observer-independent. baPWV values differ from those by cfPWV, yet they are closely correlated, have reasonable agreement in detecting increased arterial stiffness and give similar associations with carotid stiffness and atherosclerosis.
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arterial stiffness; automated; brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; validation

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32762109      PMCID: PMC8029720          DOI: 10.1111/jch.13966

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)        ISSN: 1524-6175            Impact factor:   3.738


  25 in total

1.  Expert consensus document on the measurement of aortic stiffness in daily practice using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity.

Authors:  Luc M Van Bortel; Stephane Laurent; Pierre Boutouyrie; Phil Chowienczyk; J K Cruickshank; Tine De Backer; Jan Filipovsky; Sofie Huybrechts; Francesco U S Mattace-Raso; Athanase D Protogerou; Giuseppe Schillaci; Patrick Segers; Sebastian Vermeersch; Thomas Weber
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.844

Review 2.  Brachial-Ankle Pulse Wave Velocity: Myths, Misconceptions, and Realities.

Authors:  Jun Sugawara; Hirofumi Tanaka
Journal:  Pulse (Basel)       Date:  2015-06-04

3.  Accuracy of Microlife WatchBP Office ABI monitor assessed according to the 2002 European Society of Hypertension protocol and the British Hypertension Society protocol.

Authors:  Francesca Saladini; Elisabetta Benetti; Serena Masiero; Paolo Palatini
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.444

4.  Attenuated Age-Related Increases in Arterial Stiffness in Japanese and American Women.

Authors:  Hirofumi Tanaka; Motohiko Miyachi; Haruka Murakami; Seiji Maeda; Jun Sugawara
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 5.562

5.  2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension.

Authors:  Bryan Williams; Giuseppe Mancia; Wilko Spiering; Enrico Agabiti Rosei; Michel Azizi; Michel Burnier; Denis L Clement; Antonio Coca; Giovanni de Simone; Anna Dominiczak; Thomas Kahan; Felix Mahfoud; Josep Redon; Luis Ruilope; Alberto Zanchetti; Mary Kerins; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Reinhold Kreutz; Stephane Laurent; Gregory Y H Lip; Richard McManus; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Frank Ruschitzka; Roland E Schmieder; Evgeny Shlyakhto; Costas Tsioufis; Victor Aboyans; Ileana Desormais
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 4.844

6.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Automated determination of the ankle-brachial index using an oscillometric blood pressure monitor: validation vs. Doppler measurement and cardiovascular risk factor profile.

Authors:  Anastasios Kollias; Apostolos Xilomenos; Athanase Protogerou; Evangelos Dimakakos; George S Stergiou
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 3.872

8.  Comparison between carotid-femoral and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity as measures of arterial stiffness.

Authors:  Hirofumi Tanaka; Masanori Munakata; Yuhei Kawano; Mitsuru Ohishi; Tetsuo Shoji; Jun Sugawara; Hirofumi Tomiyama; Akira Yamashina; Hisayo Yasuda; Toshitami Sawayama; Toshio Ozawa
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.844

9.  Association between macro- and microvascular damage and the triglyceride glucose index in community-dwelling elderly individuals: the Northern Shanghai Study.

Authors:  Song Zhao; Shikai Yu; Chen Chi; Ximin Fan; Jiamin Tang; Hongwei Ji; Jiadela Teliewubai; Yi Zhang; Yawei Xu
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2019-07-25       Impact factor: 9.951

Review 10.  Aortic pulse wave velocity improves cardiovascular event prediction: an individual participant meta-analysis of prospective observational data from 17,635 subjects.

Authors:  Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Melissa Spears; Chris Boustred; Margaret May; Simon G Anderson; Emelia J Benjamin; Pierre Boutouyrie; James Cameron; Chen-Huan Chen; J Kennedy Cruickshank; Shih-Jen Hwang; Edward G Lakatta; Stephane Laurent; João Maldonado; Gary F Mitchell; Samer S Najjar; Anne B Newman; Mitsuru Ohishi; Bruno Pannier; Telmo Pereira; Ramachandran S Vasan; Tomoki Shokawa; Kim Sutton-Tyrell; Francis Verbeke; Kang-Ling Wang; David J Webb; Tine Willum Hansen; Sophia Zoungas; Carmel M McEniery; John R Cockcroft; Ian B Wilkinson
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  4 in total

1.  Measuring arterial stiffness in clinical practice: Moving one step forward.

Authors:  Hao-Min Cheng; Chen-Huan Chen
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 3.738

2.  Evaluation of Aortic Elasticity Parameters in Survivors of COVID-19 Using Echocardiography Imaging.

Authors:  Uğur Küçük; Emine Gazi; Ali Duygu; Ercan Akşit
Journal:  Med Princ Pract       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 2.132

3.  Automated pulse wave velocity assessment using a professional oscillometric office blood pressure monitor.

Authors:  Anastasios Kollias; Konstantinos G Kyriakoulis; Areti Gravvani; Ioannis Anagnostopoulos; George S Stergiou
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  Associations of Brachial-Ankle Pulse Wave Velocity With Left Ventricular Geometry and Diastolic Function in Untreated Hypertensive Patients.

Authors:  Soongu Kwak; Hack-Lyoung Kim; Minjae In; Woo-Hyun Lim; Jae-Bin Seo; Sang-Hyun Kim; Joo-Hee Zo; Myung-A Kim
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-05-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.