A database of virtual healthy subjects to assess the accuracy of foot-to-foot pulse wave velocities for estimation of aortic stiffness.
Bottom Line: For each virtual subject, foot-to-foot PWV was computed from numerical pressure waveforms at the same locations where clinical measurements are commonly taken.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.
Affiliation: Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, St. Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; and firstname.lastname@example.org.Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus
Mentions: Figure 7, bottom, presents the ratio of aPWVff to aPWVth as a function of the reflection coefficient Rf at the aorto-iliac bifurcation, for all converging cases (i.e., 3,320 + 1,840 cases, including Rf > 0.3 and Rf < −0.3). The foot-to-foot PWV deviates from the theoretical value from 20 to 50% if Rf < −0.3, while the deviation is smaller than 5% if Rf > 0.3. Pressure waveforms in Fig. 7, top, illustrate the change in wave shape for different reflection coefficients. The pressure waveform at the iliac bifurcation presents oscillations if Rf is outside the physiological range: during the diastolic decay if Rf < −0.3 and in late systole if Rf > 0.3.
Affiliation: Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, St. Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; and email@example.com.