Association Between Central-Peripheral Blood Pressure Amplification and Structural and Functional Cardiac Properties in Children, Adolescents, and Adults: Impact of the Amplification Parameter, Recording System and Calibration Scheme

Díaz, Alejandro; Bia, Daniel

doi:10.1007/s40292-021-00440-2

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After calibrating brachial pulse waveforms, they were converted to a calibrated aoBP waveform using a general transfer function that represents the harmonics ratio between the pulses (the registered [brachial] and the mathematically derived [aortic]). The MOG system allows three methods of calibration: (1) ‘SD’ (based on bSBP and bDBP), (2) ‘C’ (based on bDBP and bMBPcalc), (3) ‘Osc’ (based on bDBP and bMBPosc) (Diaz et al, 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is to note that bMBP values could differ, depending on the approach used to obtain them. In this regard, bMBP could correspond to (1) the measured by oscillometry, obtained from the lowest pressure value measured during the maximum oscillations' plateau, or (2) the calculated from bSBP and bDBP, using different scaling forms (e.g., form factor: 33%) (Bia et al, 2023b; Bia et al, 2023a; Diaz & Bia, 2021; Laugesen et al, 2014; Mahieu et al, 2010; Papaioannou et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous works reported that compared to bBP, the aoSBP would be more closely associated with markers of cardiovascular structure and/or function and with the incidence of cardiovascular events (Oliveras et al, 2013; Peluso et al, 2017; Roman et al, 2010; Zuo et al, 2020). However, considering the stated above, there may be differences in the levels of aoSBP estimated, depending on the brachial pulse waveform calibration scheme considered (Bia et al, 2023b; Diaz & Bia, 2021; Díaz et al, 2019a; Wassertheurer et al, 2018; Zinoveev et al, 2019). Then, the calibration scheme could impact on the levels of association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics, on the ability of aoSBP to identify deviations from expected values and/or on the aoSBP's prognostic value (Díaz et al, 2019a; Negishi et al, 2016; Ramkumar et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of a cuff‐based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure

Bia,

Salazar,

Cinca

et al. 2023

Clin Physio Funct Imaging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionBrachial cuff‐based methods are increasingly used to estimate aortic systolic blood pressure (aoSBP). However, there are several unresolved issues.Aimsto determine to what extent the scheme used to calibrate brachial records (1) can affect noninvasive obtained aoSBP levels, and consequently, the level of agreement with the aoSBP recorded invasively, and (2) how different ways of calibrating ultimately impact the relationship between aoSBP and cardiac properties.Methodsbrachial and aortic blood pressure (BP) was simultaneously obtained by invasive (catheterisation) and noninvasive (brachial oscillometric‐device) methods (89 subjects). aoSBP was noninvasive obtained using three calibration schemes: ‘SD’: diastolic and systolic brachial BP, ‘C’: diastolic and calculated brachial mean BP (bMBP), ‘Osc’: diastolic and oscillometry‐derived bMBP. Agreement between invasive and noninvasive aoSBP, and associations between BP and echocardiographic‐derived parameters were analysed.Conclusions‘C’ and ‘SD’ schemes generated aoSBP levels lower than those recorded invasively (mean errors: 6.9 and 10.1 mmHg); the opposite was found when considering ‘Osc’(mean error: −11.4 mmHg). As individuals had higher invasive aoSBP, the three calibration schemes increasingly underestimated aoSBP levels; and viceversa. The ‘range’ of invasive aoSBP in which the calibration schemes reach the lowest error level (−5–5 mmHg) is different: ‘C’: 103–131 mmHg; ‘Osc’: 159–201 mmHg; ‘SD’:101‐124 mmHg. The calibration methods allowed reaching levels of association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics, somewhat lower, but very similar to those obtained when considering invasive aoSBP. There is no evidence of a clear superiority of one calibration method over another when considering the association between aoSBP and cardiac characteristics.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of a cuff‐based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure

Bia,

Salazar,

Cinca

et al. 2023

Clin Physio Funct Imaging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noteworthy, that baMBP levels to be used for calibration could be measured directly by oscillometry (baMBPosc; “baMBPosc/baDBP calibration”) or calculated (baMBPcalc; “baMBPcalc/baDBP calibration”) from baSBP and baDBP, using different scaling forms (e.g., classically a form factor equal to 0.33) ( 27 – 29 ). Previous studies have strongly recommended to describe in detail the calibration scheme used during the hemodynamic measures, since it is essential when interpreting the results at the time of evaluating for statistical differences and when assessing the potential clinical value of quantifying central over peripheral parameters ( 16 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 27 , 28 ). In previous studies performed on subjects of the general population (children, adolescents and adults) we showed that calibration with the “baMBPosc/baDBP” scheme resulted in higher aoBP values and stronger association between aoBP and cardiac structural properties ( 27 – 29 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aortic Pressure Levels and Waveform Indexes in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: Impact of Calibration Method on the Differences With Respect to Non-HIV Subjects and Optimal Values

Díaz

Grand

Torrado

et al. 2021

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There are scarce and controversial data on whether human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is associated with changes in aortic pressure (aoBP) and waveform-derived indexes. Moreover, it remains unknown whether potential differences in aoBP and waveform indexes between people living with HIV (PLWHIV) and subjects without HIV (HIV-) would be affected by the calibration method of the pressure waveform.Aims: To determine: (i) whether PLWHIV present differences in aoBP and waveform-derived indexes compared to HIV- subjects; (ii) the relative impact of both HIV infection and cardiovascular risk factors (CRFs) on aoBP and waveform-derived indexes; (iii) whether the results of the first and second aims are affected by the calibration method.Methods: Three groups were included: (i) PLWHIV (n = 86), (ii) HIV- subjects (general population; n = 1,000) and (iii) a Reference Group (healthy, non-exposed to CRFs; n = 398). Haemodynamic parameters, brachial pressure (baBP; systolic: baSBP; diastolic: baDBP; mean oscillometric: baMBPosc) and aoBP and waveform-derived indexes were obtained. Brachial mean calculated (baMBPcalc=baDBP+[baSBP-baDBP]/3) pressure was quantified. Three waveform calibration schemes were used: systolic-diastolic, calculated (baMBPcalc/baDBP) and oscillometric mean (baMBPosc/baDBP).Results: Regardless of CRFs and baBP, PLWHIV presented a tendency of having lower aoBP and waveform-derived indexes which clearly reached statistical significance when using the baMBPosc/baDBP or baMBPcalc/baDBP calibration. HIV status exceeded the relative weight of other CRFs as explanatory variables, being the main explanatory variable for variations in central hemodynamics when using the baMBPosc/baDBP, followed by the baMBPcalc/baDBP calibration.Conclusions: The peripheral waveform calibration approach is an important determinant to reveal differences in central hemodynamics in PLWHIV.

show abstract

“…This fi nding is in opposition to prevailing opinion, that brachial systolic blood pressure is always higher than the central one. This position can be elucidated by reasoning, that those conclusions are based on fi ndings in younger or healthy persons in physiological state, with elastic arteries, when the brachial systolic blood pressure is higher because of peripheral BP amplifi cation (1,2,8) and also as the consequence of methodological differences (12). Another group of authors (13) reported that invasively measured cSBP and brachSBP in the patients with hypertension, older than 50 years, undergoing cineangiography, all had SBP in the root of aorta higher than blood pressure in radial artery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) to brachial systolic blood pressure (brachSBP) ratio reproducibility during antihypertensive therapy

Bulas¹,

Potočárová²,

Murı́n³

et al. 2021

BLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: Higher CSBP than brachial SBP in individual patient increases cardiovascular (CV) risk. For follow-up it is important to assess the reproducibility of such measurements. The aim of this study was to assess the reproducibility of these differences, expressed as a CSBP/BrachSBP ratios. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighty-three patients on antihypertensive therapy were analysed for the reproducibility of such ratios after time interval of several month up to several years. For CSBP estimation, we used the Arteriograph (Tensiomed Ltd.), based on blood pressure measurements by cuff on oscillometric principle, using pulse wave analysis (PWA) for assessment of CSBP. RESULTS: The proportion of patients retained the same characteristics (either higher central or higher peripheral SBP) between the fi rst and second measurement was 71.1 %. The association between 1st and 2nd measurement, was statistically signifi cant, p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: In our study, a high proportion (60 %) of treated hypertensive patients had CSBP higher than brachial SBP, which may adversely infl uence their prognosis. This characteristic is highly reproducible. Taking into the account these differences may increase the exactness of CV risk estimation and may contribute to explanation of residual risk of individual patient (Tab.

show abstract

Association Between Central-Peripheral Blood Pressure Amplification and Structural and Functional Cardiac Properties in Children, Adolescents, and Adults: Impact of the Amplification Parameter, Recording System and Calibration Scheme

Cited by 6 publications

References 61 publications

Impact of a cuff‐based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure

Impact of a cuff‐based device calibration method on the agreement between invasive and noninvasive aortic and brachial pressure

Aortic Pressure Levels and Waveform Indexes in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: Impact of Calibration Method on the Differences With Respect to Non-HIV Subjects and Optimal Values

Central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) to brachial systolic blood pressure (brachSBP) ratio reproducibility during antihypertensive therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About