Laugesen Esben, Hansen Klavs W, Knudsen Søren T, Erlandsen Mogens, Ebbehøj Eva, Poulsen Per L
Medical Department M (Diabetes and Endocrinology), Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.
Blood Press Monit. 2010 Feb;15(1):18-22. doi: 10.1097/MBP.0b013e32833531f9.
The ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) has been proposed as a novel indirect measure of arterial stiffness. We compared the repeatability of AASI and pulse pressure (PP), another marker of arterial stiffness, both computed from repeat 24-h ambulatory blood pressure recordings in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
Twenty-eight patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and no previous or present treatment with antihypertensive drugs were recruited from outpatient clinics in Aarhus County and underwent two 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurements, performed within 2 weeks in all participants except one. The repeatability of AASI and PP was assessed by (i) the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and (ii) the percentage of maximal variation, i.e. two times SD of the difference in the percentage of four times the SD of the mean of the paired measurements.
The repeatability of AASI was considerably lower than for PP as estimated by ICC (0.38 vs. 0.90). The difference between ICCPP and ICCAASI was 0.51 confidence interval (0.25-0.82). Similarly, percentage of maximal variation was 68 and 23% respectively.
AASI has a low repeatability compared with PP in type 1 diabetic patients. This questions the potential implementation of AASI in the daily clinic as a measure of arterial stiffness. Further studies are necessary to clarify this.
动态动脉硬化指数(AASI)已被提议作为一种新的间接测量动脉僵硬度的指标。我们比较了AASI与脉压(PP,另一种动脉僵硬度标志物)的重复性,二者均通过1型糖尿病患者的重复24小时动态血压记录计算得出。
从奥胡斯郡的门诊招募了28例未接受过或目前未接受抗高血压药物治疗的1型糖尿病患者,除1名参与者外,所有参与者均在2周内进行了两次24小时动态血压测量。通过(i)组内相关系数(ICC)和(ii)最大变异百分比评估AASI和PP的重复性,即配对测量均值标准差四倍的差值百分比的标准差的两倍的两倍标准差。
根据ICC估计,AASI的重复性远低于PP(0.38对0.90)。ICCPP与ICCAASI之间的差异为0.51,置信区间为(0.25 - 0.82)。同样,最大变异百分比分别为68%和23%。
在1型糖尿病患者中,与PP相比,AASI的重复性较低。这对AASI在日常临床中作为动脉僵硬度测量指标的潜在应用提出了质疑。需要进一步研究来阐明这一点。