Comparison of central pressure estimates obtained from SphygmoCor, Omron HEM-9000AI and carotid applanation tonometry

Kips, Jan; Schutte, Aletta E.; Vermeersch, Sebastian; Huisman, Hugo W.; Rooyen, Johannes M. Van; Glyn, Matthew C. P.; Fourie, C.M.T.; Malan, Leoné; Schutte, Rudolph; Bortel, Luc M. Van; Segers, Patrick

doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e328346a3bc

Cited by 57 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Any significant inaccuracy was attributable to the cuff itself. This view conforms with recent data from Kips et al 3 which found a very close correlation from waveforms measured by radial tonometry, and those of O'Rourke and Takazawa. 4 The latter, noting that while central aortic pressure is superior to brachial, the acknowledged value of brachial pressure is retained when central aortic pressure is expressed in terms of brachial pressure (even though the absolute values were not expected to be the same as when actually measured invasively).…”

supporting

confidence: 92%

Generation of Accurate Aortic Pressure Waves From Calibrated Upper Limb Pressure Waveforms

O’Rourke

2011

American Journal of Hypertension

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 92%

Generation of Accurate Aortic Pressure Waves From Calibrated Upper Limb Pressure Waveforms

O’Rourke

2011

American Journal of Hypertension

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These data 27 suggest that P2-derived BPc obtained from devices other than SphygmoCor may not necessarily show brachial BP-independent relations with target organ changes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 78%

“…24 However, the use of P2 to estimate aortic BP may be invalid, because the relationship between P2-and either GTF-or carotid tonometry-derived aortic BP has consistently demonstrated a bias, 22,[24][25][26] and in some studies P2-derived aortic BP values have been reported to be markedly higher than GTF-derived aortic BP. 27 With respect to the bias noted between P2-and either GTF-derived aortic BP, as compared with GTF-derived aortic BP values, P2 underestimates pressures at lower BP values and overestimates aortic BP at higher BP values. 22,[24][25][26] However, whether estimates of aortic BP derived from P2 are associated with cardiovascular target organ changes or clinical outcomes independent of brachial BP has not been evaluated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

Brachial Blood Pressure–Independent Relations Between Radial Late Systolic Shoulder-Derived Aortic Pressures and Target Organ Changes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Central aortic blood pressure (BP; BPc) predicts outcomes beyond brachial BP. In this regard, the application of a generalized transfer function (GTF) to radial pulse waves for the derivation of BPc is an easy and reproducible measurement technique. However, the use of the GTF may not be appropriate in all circumstances. Although the peak of the second shoulder of the radial waveform (P2) is closely associated with BPc, and, hence, BPc may be assessed without the need for a GTF, whether P2-derived BPc is associated with adverse cardiovascular changes independent of brachial BP is uncertain. Thus, P2-and GTF-derived aortic BPs were assessed using applanation tonometry and SphygmoCor software. Left ventricular mass was indexed for height 1.7 (nϭ678) and carotid intima-media thickness (IMT; nϭ462) was determined using echocardiography and vascular ultrasound. With adjustments for nurse-derived brachial pulse pressure (PP), P2-derived central PP was independently associated with left ventricular mass indexed for height 1.7 (partial rϭ0.18; PϽ0.0001) and IMT (partial rϭ0.40; PϽ0.0001). These relations were similar to nurse-derived brachial PP-independent relations between GTF-derived central PP and target organ changes (left ventricular mass indexed for height 1.7 : partial rϭ0.17, PϽ0.0001; IMT: partial rϭ0.37, PϽ0.0001). In contrast, with adjustments for central PP, nurse-derived brachial PP-target organ relations were eliminated (partial rϭϪ0.21 to 0.05). Twenty-four-hour, day, and night PP-target organ relations did not survive adjustments for nurse-derived brachial BP. In conclusion, central PP derived from P2, which does not require a GTF, is associated with cardiovascular target organ changes independent of brachial BP. Thus, when assessing adverse cardiovascular effects of aortic BP independent of brachial BP, P2-derived measures may complement GTF-derived measures of aortic BP. here is increasing evidence in various clinical or general populations that central aortic blood pressure (BP) predicts cardiovascular outcomes more closely or independent of BP measured at the brachial artery.

show abstract

“…14,18 Another study suggested that these differences may be due to algorithm differences. 19 The large differences reported there warranted the need for thorough validation of any new device, such as Abbreviations: Aix@HR75, corrected augmentation index by heart rate; ED, ejection duration; SEVR, subendocardial viability ratio.…”

Section: Participant Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between central blood pressure values obtained by the Gaon system and the SphygmoCor system

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Central pulse pressure is correlated with carotid atherosclerosis and the incidence of cardiovascular events more significantly than brachial pulse pressure. Augmentation index (Aix) has been shown to be an independent predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Pulse wave analysis using the Gaon system allows for the estimation of central blood pressure (CBP), corrected augmentation index (Aix@HR75), ejection duration (ED) and subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR), and is widely used in clinical research in Korea. However, the accuracy of this system is controversial. From February 2008 to March 2011, 99 patients were recruited for this study. Measurements were taken both by the Gaon system and the SphygmoCor system on the same day for all study participants. The estimated values of CBP, Aix@HR75, ED and SEVR for the two systems were compared using paired t-tests, simple correlation analyses and Bland-Altman plots. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) estimated by the two systems was significantly (Po0.001) correlated; the coefficient was 0.982. The two s.d. of the difference in SBP between these systems was quite small-o7 mm Hg. Aix@HR75, ED and SEVR as estimated by the two systems were also significantly correlated, although they, especially SEVR, showed much weaker correlations than were observed in SBP: coefficients for Aix@HR75, ED and SEVR were 0.727, 0.648 and 0.230, respectively. We assessed the CBP of Korean patients estimated by the two systems and observed that the correlations of Aix, ED and SEVR were weaker than that of CBP. Such variations may be due to the difference in measuring methods between the devices. As even a slight change in pulse waveforms may result in a large difference in estimations, parameters, including Aix@HR75, ED and SEVR, should be carefully interpreted by experienced clinicians.

show abstract

Comparison of central pressure estimates obtained from SphygmoCor, Omron HEM-9000AI and carotid applanation tonometry

Abstract: The results from this study demonstrate that the considerable difference between the central pressure estimates of Omron HEM-9000AI and SphygmoCor is due to algorithm differences, and suggest that the overestimation by Omron HEM-9000AI is larger than the underestimation by SphygmoCor.

Cited by 57 publications

References 22 publications

Generation of Accurate Aortic Pressure Waves From Calibrated Upper Limb Pressure Waveforms

Generation of Accurate Aortic Pressure Waves From Calibrated Upper Limb Pressure Waveforms

Brachial Blood Pressure–Independent Relations Between Radial Late Systolic Shoulder-Derived Aortic Pressures and Target Organ Changes

A comparison between central blood pressure values obtained by the Gaon system and the SphygmoCor system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About