Comparison of two measuring instruments, B-pro and SphygmoCor system as reference, to evaluate central systolic blood pressure and radial augmentation index

Abstract

Central arterial pressure estimated with B-Pro in healthy Caucasians without drug treatment offers adequate validity vs. the reference standard (SphygmoCor). However, in the estimation of rAIx, some differences with respect to the reference standard have been detected, probably related to measurement of the second peak of the radial wave.

Tonometric devices for central aortic systolic pressure measurements in patients with type 1 diabetes

“…We and others have shown the BPro device to be applicable in T1DM and patients with cardiovascular disease or hypertension [5,6]. However, it has not yet been validated in type 2 diabetes.…”

“…Recently, tonometric devices for ambulatory application have been manufactured and are now commercially available. The BPro device measures ambulatory 24-h central and brachial BP and has been validated against both invasive and noninvasive devices in patients with cardiovascular disease [5] and in individuals without hypertension or diabetes [6]. Patients with diabetes often have increased arterial stiffness [7], and tonometric BP measurements may therefore be impeded in these patients.…”

Glycemic index, glycemic load, and pulse wave reflection in adults

“…PAIx was calculated as the second peak of systolic blood pressure (SBP2) e diastolic blood pressure (DBP)/first peak SBP e DBP Â 100, thus yielding a percent (%) value. This device has been validated in hypertensive Asian subjects [22] and healthy white subjects not receiving drug treatments [24]. The intraobserver reliability of this technique was evaluated in 20 subjects before the present study began via the intraclass correlation coefficient, which showed values of 0.971 (95% CI: 0.923e0.989) for the central aortic systolic pressure and 0.952 (95% CI: 0.871e0.982) for the PAIx.…”

“…The intraobserver reliability of this technique was evaluated in 20 subjects before the present study began via the intraclass correlation coefficient, which showed values of 0.971 (95% CI: 0.923e0.989) for the central aortic systolic pressure and 0.952 (95% CI: 0.871e0.982) for the PAIx. Using the BlandeAltman analysis, the mean difference for intraobserver agreement (i.e., with 95% limits of agreement) were À0.056 (95% CI: À9.41e9.30) for the central aortic systolic pressure and 2.50 (95% CI: e14.43e19.46) for PAIx [24]. Because PAIx is affected by heart rate (HR), its values were corrected to a HR of 75 bpm according to the following equation: PAIx75 Z PAIx * (HR/75).…”

Central Aortic Systolic Blood Pressure Exhibits Advantages Over Brachial Blood Pressure Measurements in Chronic Kidney Disease Risk Prediction in Women

“…From the radial pulse wave, the software estimates the CSBP using an n-point moving average method, a mathematical low-pass filter [19]. Studies have shown an accurate agreement in CSBP compared with invasively measured CSBP [16,17]. BMI was calculated using the formula weight/height 2 (kg/m 2 ).…”