Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.

OBJECTIVES:Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is the proposed gold-standard for the assessment of aortic elastic properties. The aim of this study was to compare aortic PWV determined by a recently developed oscillometric device with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). METHODS:PWV was assessed in 40 vo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hans-Josef Feistritzer, Sebastian J Reinstadler, Gert Klug, Christian Kremser, Benjamin Seidner, Regina Esterhammer, Michael F Schocke, Wolfgang-Michael Franz, Bernhard Metzler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2015-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4303422?pdf=render
id doaj-9565791f180f45bdb013207d8f50519d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9565791f180f45bdb013207d8f50519d2020-11-24T22:18:39ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-01101e011686210.1371/journal.pone.0116862Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.Hans-Josef FeistritzerSebastian J ReinstadlerGert KlugChristian KremserBenjamin SeidnerRegina EsterhammerMichael F SchockeWolfgang-Michael FranzBernhard MetzlerOBJECTIVES:Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is the proposed gold-standard for the assessment of aortic elastic properties. The aim of this study was to compare aortic PWV determined by a recently developed oscillometric device with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). METHODS:PWV was assessed in 40 volunteers with two different methods. The oscillometric method (PWVOSC) is based on a transfer function from the brachial pressure waves determined by oscillometric blood pressure measurements with a common cuff (Mobil-O-Graph, I.E.M. Stolberg, Germany). CMR was used to determine aortic PWVCMR with the use of the transit time method based on phase-contrast imaging at the level of the ascending and abdominal aorta on a clinical 1.5 Tesla scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). RESULTS:The median age of the study population was 34 years (IQR: 24-55 years, 11 females). A very strong correlation was found between PWVOSC and PWVCMR (r = 0.859, p < 0.001). Mean PWVOSC was 6.7 ± 1.8 m/s and mean PWVCMR was 6.1 ± 1.8 m/s (p < 0.001). Analysis of agreement between the two measurements using Bland-Altman method showed a bias of 0.57 m/s (upper and lower limit of agreement: 2.49 m/s and -1.34 m/s). The corresponding coefficient of variation between both measurements was 15%. CONCLUSION:Aortic pulse wave velocity assessed by transformation of the brachial pressure waveform showed an acceptable agreement with the CMR-derived transit time method.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4303422?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Hans-Josef Feistritzer
Sebastian J Reinstadler
Gert Klug
Christian Kremser
Benjamin Seidner
Regina Esterhammer
Michael F Schocke
Wolfgang-Michael Franz
Bernhard Metzler
spellingShingle Hans-Josef Feistritzer
Sebastian J Reinstadler
Gert Klug
Christian Kremser
Benjamin Seidner
Regina Esterhammer
Michael F Schocke
Wolfgang-Michael Franz
Bernhard Metzler
Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Hans-Josef Feistritzer
Sebastian J Reinstadler
Gert Klug
Christian Kremser
Benjamin Seidner
Regina Esterhammer
Michael F Schocke
Wolfgang-Michael Franz
Bernhard Metzler
author_sort Hans-Josef Feistritzer
title Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
title_short Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
title_full Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
title_fullStr Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
title_sort comparison of an oscillometric method with cardiac magnetic resonance for the analysis of aortic pulse wave velocity.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2015-01-01
description OBJECTIVES:Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is the proposed gold-standard for the assessment of aortic elastic properties. The aim of this study was to compare aortic PWV determined by a recently developed oscillometric device with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). METHODS:PWV was assessed in 40 volunteers with two different methods. The oscillometric method (PWVOSC) is based on a transfer function from the brachial pressure waves determined by oscillometric blood pressure measurements with a common cuff (Mobil-O-Graph, I.E.M. Stolberg, Germany). CMR was used to determine aortic PWVCMR with the use of the transit time method based on phase-contrast imaging at the level of the ascending and abdominal aorta on a clinical 1.5 Tesla scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). RESULTS:The median age of the study population was 34 years (IQR: 24-55 years, 11 females). A very strong correlation was found between PWVOSC and PWVCMR (r = 0.859, p < 0.001). Mean PWVOSC was 6.7 ± 1.8 m/s and mean PWVCMR was 6.1 ± 1.8 m/s (p < 0.001). Analysis of agreement between the two measurements using Bland-Altman method showed a bias of 0.57 m/s (upper and lower limit of agreement: 2.49 m/s and -1.34 m/s). The corresponding coefficient of variation between both measurements was 15%. CONCLUSION:Aortic pulse wave velocity assessed by transformation of the brachial pressure waveform showed an acceptable agreement with the CMR-derived transit time method.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4303422?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT hansjoseffeistritzer comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT sebastianjreinstadler comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT gertklug comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT christiankremser comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT benjaminseidner comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT reginaesterhammer comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT michaelfschocke comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT wolfgangmichaelfranz comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
AT bernhardmetzler comparisonofanoscillometricmethodwithcardiacmagneticresonancefortheanalysisofaorticpulsewavevelocity
_version_ 1725782471910359040