Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Extremadura Health Service, Cáceres, Spain.
Iberian Network on Central Hemodynamic and Arterial Structure, Salamanca, Spain.
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 1;13(11):e0206434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206434. eCollection 2018.
An automated method for measuring arterial path length with devices that determine pulse wave velocity (PWV) in peripheral arteries is frequently applied. We aimed to compare arterial path length measurements based on mathematical height-based formulas with those measured manually and to assess whether the ankle-brachial difference (abD-PWV) measured with the VOPITB device is comparable to that obtained by manual measurements. In 245 patients, a metric measuring tape was used to determine the arterial path length from the suprasternal notch to the midpoint of the VOPITB cuffs wrapped around the extremities, and the results were compared with those obtained with height-based formulas. We examined the relationship between the abD-PWV measured with both methods. The arterial path length measured manually was shorter than that calculated automatically by 5 ± 2 and 30 ± 4 cm-of 13% and 21% for the arms and legs, respectively (difference of 13% and 21%). As a result, the abD-PWV calculated with the automatic method was greater (automatic abD-PWV vs. manual: 462 ± 90 vs. 346 ± 79 cm/s). The Blant Altman plot showed a percentage error of: 15,2%, 7,5% and 17,3% for heart-brachial, heart-ankle length and abD-PWV respectively. In conclusion there were significant differences between manual and automated arterial length measurements and it translates into difference abD-PWV calculate from both methods. However, the Bland-Alman plot showed that abD-PWV was comparable for both techniques. The advantages of height-based formulas for the calculation of arterial path lengths suggest that they may be the recommended method for measuring the abD-PWV.
一种用于测量动脉路径长度的自动化方法是经常应用于通过测量外周动脉脉搏波速度(PWV)的设备。我们旨在比较基于数学身高公式的动脉路径长度测量值与手动测量值,并评估使用 VOPITB 设备测量的踝臂差异(abD-PWV)是否与手动测量值相当。在 245 例患者中,使用度量带从胸骨上切迹到环绕四肢的 VOPITB 袖口的中点确定动脉路径长度,并将结果与基于身高公式的结果进行比较。我们检查了两种方法测量的 abD-PWV 之间的关系。手动测量的动脉路径长度比自动测量的短 5±2cm 和 30±4cm,分别为手臂和腿部的 13%和 21%(差异为 13%和 21%)。因此,自动方法计算的 abD-PWV 更大(自动 abD-PWV 与手动:462±90 与 346±79cm/s)。 Bland-Altman 图显示了心脏-肱动脉长度和 abD-PWV 的百分比误差分别为:15.2%、7.5%和 17.3%。总之,手动和自动动脉长度测量之间存在显著差异,这转化为两种方法计算的 abD-PWV 差异。然而, Bland-Altman 图显示两种技术的 abD-PWV 相当。基于身高公式计算动脉路径长度的优势表明,它们可能是测量 abD-PWV 的推荐方法。