- Split View
-
Views
-
CiteCitation
Michael F. O'Rourke, Audrey Adji, Alberto P. Avolio, John R. Cockcroft, Ian B. Wilkinson; P-279: Anomalies of wave reflection phenomena in clinical studies, American Journal of Hypertension, Volume 17, Issue S1, 1 May 2004, Pages 133A–134A, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjhyper.2004.03.354
Download citation file:
© 2018 Oxford University Press
Close -
Share
Abstract
Pulse waveform analysis is contentious, with spirited debate between investigators who use a generalised transfer function to generate the aortic waveform from the radial pressure pulse, and those who rely on non-invasive measurement of the carotid pressure waveforms, or invasive measurement of the aortic waveform with fluid-filled catheter systems. The present report seeks to clarify this issue.
In a cohort of 999 patients attending a clinical cardiovascular outpatient service, pressure waveforms were measured non-invasively in the radial artery (8917 reports), with the ascending aortic pressure waveform generated by SphygmoCor®. Results for key parameters Tr (time from wave foot to onset of reflected wave) and AIx (augmented pressure/pulse pressure) were compared with those in the literature, and specifically with the Australian National Blood Pressure (ANBP2) substudy of carotid waveforms1 and another which analysed invasively recorded aortic waveforms2.
Data generated in this study from the radial pressure waveforms were similar to seminal data , but different to those in other Australian carotid and aorta studies. For the ANBP2 study1, the average value of Tr (80 msec) was very short, and lower than any value recorded by us (lowest 89 msec) while AIx was higher, often exceeding 50%, which indicates reflected wave amplitude greater than incident wave. In contrast, for the aortic pressure waves of Hope et al2, average Tr (161 msec) was far higher, and AIx far lower (14.4%) than the ANBP2 study, while our data and that of Murgo et al3 were intermediate. (See Table)
| Radial-aortic TF | Murgo et al3 (A) | Carotid1 | Aorta2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 999 | 7 | 873 | 78 |
| Age (years) | 66 ± 15 | 40 | 72 | 64 |
| Tr (msec) | 140 ± 14 | 136 | 80 | 161 |
| AIx (%) | 25 ± 13 | 23 | 34 | 14 |
| Radial-aortic TF | Murgo et al3 (A) | Carotid1 | Aorta2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 999 | 7 | 873 | 78 |
| Age (years) | 66 ± 15 | 40 | 72 | 64 |
| Tr (msec) | 140 ± 14 | 136 | 80 | 161 |
| AIx (%) | 25 ± 13 | 23 | 34 | 14 |
TF; transfer function.
| Radial-aortic TF | Murgo et al3 (A) | Carotid1 | Aorta2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 999 | 7 | 873 | 78 |
| Age (years) | 66 ± 15 | 40 | 72 | 64 |
| Tr (msec) | 140 ± 14 | 136 | 80 | 161 |
| AIx (%) | 25 ± 13 | 23 | 34 | 14 |
| Radial-aortic TF | Murgo et al3 (A) | Carotid1 | Aorta2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 999 | 7 | 873 | 78 |
| Age (years) | 66 ± 15 | 40 | 72 | 64 |
| Tr (msec) | 140 ± 14 | 136 | 80 | 161 |
| AIx (%) | 25 ± 13 | 23 | 34 | 14 |
TF; transfer function.
Differences in manifestations of wave reflection in the literature are extreme, and difficult to reconcile with seminal invasive, and current non-invasive studies.
