Rossen Niklas Blach, Laugesen Esben, Peters Christian Daugaard, Ebbehøj Eva, Knudsen Søren Tang, Poulsen Per Løgstrup, Bøtker Hans Erik, Hansen Klavs Würgler
Department of Medicine, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark.
Am J Hypertens. 2014 May;27(5):674-9. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpt162. Epub 2013 Aug 31.
Central blood pressure (BP) has attracted increasing interest because of a potential superiority over brachial BP in predicting cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Several devices estimating central BP noninvasively are now available. The aim of our study was to determine the validity of the Arteriograph, a brachial cuff-based, oscillometric device, in patients with type 2 diabetes.
We measured central BP invasively and compared it with the Arteriograph-estimated values in 22 type 2 diabetic patients referred to elective coronary angiography.
The difference (invasively measured BP minus Arteriograph-estimated BP) in central systolic BP (SBP) was 4.4±8.7 mm Hg (P = 0.03). The limits of agreement were ±17.1 mm Hg.
Compared with invasively measured central SBP, we found a systematic underestimation by the Arteriograph. However, the limits of agreement were similar to the previous Arteriograph validation study and to the invasive validation studies of other brachial cuff-based, oscillometric devices. A limitation in our study was the large number of patients (n = 14 of 36) in which the Arteriograph was unable to analyze the pressure curves. In a research setting, the Arteriograph seems applicable in patients with type 2 diabetes.
ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01538290.
由于中心血压在预测心血管疾病发病率和死亡率方面可能优于肱动脉血压，其已引起越来越多的关注。目前已有几种非侵入性估算中心血压的设备。我们研究的目的是确定基于肱动脉袖带的示波测量设备动脉造影仪在2型糖尿病患者中的有效性。
我们对22例接受择期冠状动脉造影的2型糖尿病患者进行了中心血压的有创测量，并将其与动脉造影仪估算值进行比较。
中心收缩压（SBP）的差异（有创测量血压减去动脉造影仪估算血压）为4.4±8.7 mmHg（P = 0.03）。一致性界限为±17.1 mmHg。
与有创测量的中心SBP相比，我们发现动脉造影仪存在系统性低估。然而，一致性界限与先前的动脉造影仪验证研究以及其他基于肱动脉袖带的示波测量设备的有创验证研究相似。我们研究的一个局限性是大量患者（36例中有14例）的动脉造影仪无法分析压力曲线。在研究环境中，动脉造影仪似乎适用于2型糖尿病患者。
ClinicalTrials.gov标识符NCT01538290。
