INTRODUCTION: Derivation of blood flow velocity from a blood pressure waveform is a novel technique, which could have potential clinical importance. Excess pressure, calculated from the blood pressure waveform via the reservoir-excess pressure model, is purported to be an analogue of blood flow velocity but this has never been examined in detail, which was the aim of this study. METHODS: Intra-arterial blood pressure was measured sequentially at the brachial and radial arteries via fluid-filled catheter simultaneously with blood flow velocity waveforms recorded via Doppler ultrasound on the contralateral arm (n = 98, aged 61 ± 10 years, 72% men). Excess pressure was derived from intra-arterial blood pressure waveforms using pressure-only reservoir-excess pressure analysis. RESULTS: Brachial and radial blood flow velocity waveform morphology were closely approximated by excess pressure derived from their respective sites of measurement (median cross-correlation coefficient r = 0.96 and r = 0.95 for brachial and radial comparisons, respectively). In frequency analyses, coherence between blood flow velocity and excess pressure was similar for brachial and radial artery comparisons (brachial and radial median coherence = 0.93 and 0.92, respectively). Brachial and radial blood flow velocity pulse heights were correlated with their respective excess pressure pulse heights (r = 0.53, P < 0.001 and r = 0.43, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Excess pressure is an analogue of blood flow velocity, thus affording the opportunity to derive potentially important information related to arterial blood flow using only the blood pressure waveform.
INTRODUCTION: Derivation of blood flow velocity from a blood pressure waveform is a novel technique, which could have potential clinical importance. Excess pressure, calculated from the blood pressure waveform via the reservoir-excess pressure model, is purported to be an analogue of blood flow velocity but this has never been examined in detail, which was the aim of this study. METHODS: Intra-arterial blood pressure was measured sequentially at the brachial and radial arteries via fluid-filled catheter simultaneously with blood flow velocity waveforms recorded via Doppler ultrasound on the contralateral arm (n = 98, aged 61 ± 10 years, 72% men). Excess pressure was derived from intra-arterial blood pressure waveforms using pressure-only reservoir-excess pressure analysis. RESULTS: Brachial and radial blood flow velocity waveform morphology were closely approximated by excess pressure derived from their respective sites of measurement (median cross-correlation coefficient r = 0.96 and r = 0.95 for brachial and radial comparisons, respectively). In frequency analyses, coherence between blood flow velocity and excess pressure was similar for brachial and radial artery comparisons (brachial and radial median coherence = 0.93 and 0.92, respectively). Brachial and radial blood flow velocity pulse heights were correlated with their respective excess pressure pulse heights (r = 0.53, P < 0.001 and r = 0.43, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Excess pressure is an analogue of blood flow velocity, thus affording the opportunity to derive potentially important information related to arterial blood flow using only the blood pressure waveform.
Authors: Jiun-Jr Wang; Aoife B O'Brien; Nigel G Shrive; Kim H Parker; John V Tyberg Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2002-12-12 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Bernhard Hametner; Siegfried Wassertheurer; Johannes Kropf; Christopher Mayer; Andreas Holzinger; Bernd Eber; Thomas Weber Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2012-10-27 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Scott T Chiesa; Stefano Masi; Martin J Shipley; Elizabeth A Ellins; Alan G Fraser; Alun D Hughes; Riyaz S Patel; Ashraf W Khir; Julian P Halcox; Archana Singh-Manoux; Mika Kivimaki; David S Celermajer; John E Deanfield Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2019-07-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Shun Kamoi; Christopher Pretty; Joel Balmer; Shaun Davidson; Antoine Pironet; Thomas Desaive; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase Journal: Biomed Eng Online Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 2.819