AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY MEASURED BY PULSE WAVE IMAGING (PWI): A COMPARISON WITH APPLANATION TONOMETRY.
AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY MEASURED BY PULSE WAVE IMAGING (PWI): A COMPARISON WITH APPLANATION TONOMETRY.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.artres.2011.03.002
复制
发表时间：
2011-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
0.6
通讯作者：
Konofagou, Elisa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vappou, Jonathan;Luo, Jianwen;Okajima, Kazue;Di Tullio, Marco;Konofagou, Elisa
动脉僵硬度是一种公认的心血管疾病预后指标。脉搏波速度（PWV）是动脉硬度的替代指标，可以通过颈动脉至股动脉压平血压计测量全局，也可以通过生物医学成像方法测量局部。脉冲波成像（PWI）是一种基于超声的方法，用于定性可视化脉冲波传播和定量估计动脉刚度。本研究的目的是通过比较PWI获得的局部腹主动脉PWV值与用压平血压计测量的颈动脉-股动脉PWV值来评估PWI在PWV估计中的表现。对18例无心血管病史的患者（年龄18 - 66岁，32.5±14.5岁）进行PWI和血压计连续检测。两种方法所得值的相关系数r为0.68。线性回归得到PWVPWI = 1.02* PWVtonometry +0.15。Tukey均差图显示，在较低的PWV值（PWV≤7 m/s）下，PWVPWI显著低于PWVtonometry (- 0.3 m/s)，而在较高的PWV值（PWV≤7 m/s）下，PWVPWI显著高于PWVtonometry （+1.4 m/s）。尽管PWVPWI测量具有区域性，但与全球PWVtonometry测量相反，腹部PWVPWI和颈动脉-股动脉PWVtonometry值相似，平均偏差为0.25 m/s。这种偏差及其随PWV的变化可以部分解释为沿动脉树的PWV的生理变化，以及随着PWV的增加，PWI估计的PWV的不确定性增加。
Arterial stiffness is a well-established indicator of cardiovascular disease outcome. Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) is a surrogate for arterial stiffness that is measured either globally using carotid to femoral applanation tonometry or locally using biomedical imaging methods. Pulse Wave Imaging (PWI) is an ultrasound-based method for both qualitative visualisation of pulse wave propagation and quantitative estimation of arterial stiffness. The objective of this study is to assess the PWI performance in PWV estimation by comparing local abdominal aortic PWV values obtained by PWI to the carotid-femoral PWV measured by applanation tonometry. A total of 18 subjects (age 18–66, 32.5±14.5) with no history of cardiovascular disease were consecutively tested by both PWI and tonometry. The correlation coefficient r between values found by the two methods was found to be equal to 0.68. A linear regression yielded PWVPWI = 1.02* PWVtonometry +0.15. Tukey mean-difference plots indicated that PWVPWI was significantly lower than PWVtonometry (−0.3 m/s) at lower PWV values (PWV≤7 m/s), whereas PWVPWI was significantly higher (+1.4 m/s) than PWVtonometry at higher PWV values (PWV>7 m/s). Despite the regional nature of the PWVPWI measurements, as opposed to the global PWVtonometry measurements, abdominal PWVPWI and carotid-femoral PWVtonometry values were found to be similar, with an average bias equal to 0.25 m/s. Such a bias and its variation with PWV may be partially explained by both physiological variations of PWV along the arterial tree and by the increasing uncertainty of the PWV estimate by PWI as PWV increases.