Suppr超能文献

无创评估中心和外周动脉压(波形):校准方法的意义。

Noninvasive assessment of central and peripheral arterial pressure (waveforms): implications of calibration methods.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacology, Belgium.

出版信息

J Hypertens. 2010 Feb;28(2):300-5. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283340a1a.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Noninvasive estimation of central blood pressure (BP) from radial artery pressure waveforms is increasingly applied. We investigated the impact of radial artery waveform calibration on central BP assessment and calculated pressure amplification, with focus on the one-third rule used to estimate mean arterial BP (MAP).

METHODS

Pressure waveforms were noninvasively measured at the radial and carotid arteries in 1873 individuals (age 45.8+/-6.1 years). Radial and carotid artery waveforms were calibrated using brachial artery DBP and SBP, MAP estimated with the one-third rule and MAP estimated as brachial DBP along with 40% of brachial artery pulse pressure.

RESULTS

Central SBP obtained via a transfer function was 123.5 +/- 15.7, 117.8 +/- 14.2 and 126.0 +/- 15.4 mmHg (mean +/- SD) following above-mentioned three calibration schemes, respectively. Using the same calibration schemes, carotid artery SBP was 131.4 +/- 15.2, 118.4 +/- 14.4 and 126.8 +/- 15.7 mmHg, respectively. Central-to-brachial amplification was 13.0 +/- 3.6 mmHg using second method as compared with 4.6 +/- 3.8 mmHg with third method. Brachial-to-radial amplification was actually negative (-6.3 +/- 4.5 mmHg) using second method, whereas 3.4 +/- 5.5 mmHg was found with third method.

CONCLUSION

Both carotid artery SBP and central SBP obtained via a transfer function are highly sensitive to the calibration of the respective carotid artery and radial artery pressure waveforms. Our data suggest that the one-third rule to calculate MAP from brachial cuff BP should be avoided, especially when used to calibrate radial artery pressure waveforms for subsequent application of a pressure transfer function. Until more precise estimation methods become available, it is advisable to use 40% of brachial pulse pressure instead of 33% to assess MAP.

摘要

目的

从桡动脉压力波形无创估计中心血压(BP)的应用越来越广泛。我们研究了桡动脉波形校准对中心 BP 评估的影响,并计算了压力放大,重点是用于估计平均动脉压(MAP)的三分之一规则。

方法

在 1873 名个体(年龄 45.8+/-6.1 岁)中,非侵入性地测量桡动脉和颈动脉的压力波形。使用肱动脉 DBP 和 SBP 校准桡动脉和颈动脉波形,使用三分之一规则估计 MAP,以及使用肱动脉 DBP 加上肱动脉脉搏压的 40%估计 MAP。

结果

通过传递函数获得的中心 SBP 分别为 123.5 +/- 15.7、117.8 +/- 14.2 和 126.0 +/- 15.4mmHg(平均值 +/- SD),采用上述三种校准方案。使用相同的校准方案,颈动脉 SBP 分别为 131.4 +/- 15.2、118.4 +/- 14.4 和 126.8 +/- 15.7mmHg。与第三种方法相比,第二种方法的中心-肱动脉放大率为 13.0 +/- 3.6mmHg,而第二种方法的实际为负(-6.3 +/- 4.5mmHg)。

结论

通过传递函数获得的颈动脉 SBP 和中心 SBP 都对各自的颈动脉和桡动脉压力波形的校准高度敏感。我们的数据表明,从臂袖 BP 计算 MAP 的三分之一规则应该避免,特别是在用于校准桡动脉压力波形以随后应用压力传递函数时。在更精确的估计方法可用之前,建议使用肱动脉脉搏压的 40%代替 33%来评估 MAP。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验