Limits...
A database of virtual healthy subjects to assess the accuracy of foot-to-foot pulse wave velocities for estimation of aortic stiffness.

Willemet M, Chowienczyk P, Alastruey J - Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. (2015)

Bottom Line: Our numerical results confirm clinical observations: 1) carotid-femoral PWV is a good indicator of aortic stiffness and correlates well with aortic PWV; 2) brachial-ankle PWV overestimates aortic PWV and is related to the stiffness and geometry of both elastic and muscular arteries; and 3) muscular PWV (carotid-radial, femoral-ankle) does not capture the stiffening of the aorta and should therefore not be used as a surrogate for aortic stiffness.In addition, our analysis highlights that the foot-to-foot PWV algorithm is sensitive to the presence of reflected waves in late diastole, which introduce errors in the PWV estimates.In this study, we have created a database of virtual healthy subjects, which can be used to assess theoretically the efficiency of physiological indexes based on pulse wave analysis.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, St. Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; and marie.willemet@gmail.com.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Distribution and mean value (in mmHg) of the mean blood pressure (MBP; A), pulse pressure (PP; B), and diastolic (DBP; C) and systolic (SBP; D) blood pressure at the aortic root for the virtual database. The DBP presents a distribution slightly truncated on the left, as a result of the filtering criteria (filter #1).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4537944&req=5

Figure 2: Distribution and mean value (in mmHg) of the mean blood pressure (MBP; A), pulse pressure (PP; B), and diastolic (DBP; C) and systolic (SBP; D) blood pressure at the aortic root for the virtual database. The DBP presents a distribution slightly truncated on the left, as a result of the filtering criteria (filter #1).

Mentions: Blood pressures of all virtual subjects present physiological values with well-balanced distributions (Fig. 2). Cardiac outputs vary between 3.5 and 7.2 l/min, depending on the values of HR (53, 63, and 72 beats/min) and SV (66, 83, and 100 ml) prescribed. Figure 3 shows the distribution of central and peripheral foot-to-foot PWV. Central PWV (aPWV and cfPWV) have similar distributions with a median value ∼7.5 m/s, while peripheral PWV increase to higher distinct levels [median PWV at 10.8 m/s (baPWV), 13.1 m/s (faPWV) and 9.1 m/s (crPWV)]. Dispersions of PWV from the 25th to the 75th percentiles range from 2.5 to 3.5 m/s for all PWV, except for the faPWV (4.5 m/s). All PWV present normal distributions within physiological values, as observed in epidemiological studies of healthy subjects (19, 31, 47).


A database of virtual healthy subjects to assess the accuracy of foot-to-foot pulse wave velocities for estimation of aortic stiffness.

Willemet M, Chowienczyk P, Alastruey J - Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. (2015)

Distribution and mean value (in mmHg) of the mean blood pressure (MBP; A), pulse pressure (PP; B), and diastolic (DBP; C) and systolic (SBP; D) blood pressure at the aortic root for the virtual database. The DBP presents a distribution slightly truncated on the left, as a result of the filtering criteria (filter #1).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4537944&req=5

Figure 2: Distribution and mean value (in mmHg) of the mean blood pressure (MBP; A), pulse pressure (PP; B), and diastolic (DBP; C) and systolic (SBP; D) blood pressure at the aortic root for the virtual database. The DBP presents a distribution slightly truncated on the left, as a result of the filtering criteria (filter #1).
Mentions: Blood pressures of all virtual subjects present physiological values with well-balanced distributions (Fig. 2). Cardiac outputs vary between 3.5 and 7.2 l/min, depending on the values of HR (53, 63, and 72 beats/min) and SV (66, 83, and 100 ml) prescribed. Figure 3 shows the distribution of central and peripheral foot-to-foot PWV. Central PWV (aPWV and cfPWV) have similar distributions with a median value ∼7.5 m/s, while peripheral PWV increase to higher distinct levels [median PWV at 10.8 m/s (baPWV), 13.1 m/s (faPWV) and 9.1 m/s (crPWV)]. Dispersions of PWV from the 25th to the 75th percentiles range from 2.5 to 3.5 m/s for all PWV, except for the faPWV (4.5 m/s). All PWV present normal distributions within physiological values, as observed in epidemiological studies of healthy subjects (19, 31, 47).

Bottom Line: Our numerical results confirm clinical observations: 1) carotid-femoral PWV is a good indicator of aortic stiffness and correlates well with aortic PWV; 2) brachial-ankle PWV overestimates aortic PWV and is related to the stiffness and geometry of both elastic and muscular arteries; and 3) muscular PWV (carotid-radial, femoral-ankle) does not capture the stiffening of the aorta and should therefore not be used as a surrogate for aortic stiffness.In addition, our analysis highlights that the foot-to-foot PWV algorithm is sensitive to the presence of reflected waves in late diastole, which introduce errors in the PWV estimates.In this study, we have created a database of virtual healthy subjects, which can be used to assess theoretically the efficiency of physiological indexes based on pulse wave analysis.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, St. Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; and marie.willemet@gmail.com.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus