Suppr超能文献

采用三种不同方法和技术测量中心增强指数:Arteriograph、Complior 和 Mobil-O-Graph 设备之间的一致性。

Measurement of central augmentation index by three different methods and techniques: Agreement among Arteriograph, Complior, and Mobil-O-Graph devices.

机构信息

Medical School, 1st and 2nd Department of Cardiology, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019 Sep;21(9):1386-1392. doi: 10.1111/jch.13654. Epub 2019 Aug 29.

Abstract

Wave reflection at central arteries consists of a major component of left ventricular afterload. Central augmentation index (AIx) is the most widely used surrogate of wave reflection. Recent technological developments now provide the ability to obtain, non-invasively, aortic, or carotid pressure waves and measure AIx based on various algorithms of pulse wave analysis. The aim of this study was to compare AIx measurements performed by the Arteriograph, Complior, and Mobil-O-Graph apparatuses. Recordings by each device in randomized order were performed with 5-minute interval at 211 individuals (age 55.1 ± 14.1 years, 67.8% males) who underwent diagnostic cardiovascular assessment. All measurements were obtained at the supine position, and AIx was calculated using the formula AIx = 100 × (Augmentation pressure)/(Pulse Pressure). Bland-Altman analysis was performed. Mean difference (bias) ± one standard deviation of difference (with limits of agreement) of AIx between different devices was as follows: (a) Mobil-O-Graph vs Complior: -2.1 ± 14.8% (-31.1% to 26.9%), (b) Arteriograph vs Complior: 12.9 ± 14.6% (-15.7% to 41.5%), and (c) Mobil-O-Graph vs Arteriograph: -10.8 ± 16.9% (-43.9% to 22.3%). The three examined devices exerted significant differences in central AIx estimation which makes the three devices non-interchangeable for wave reflection assessment. However, the Mobil-O-Graph device showed the highest agreement (lowest bias) with the Complior system as regards to the AIx measurement.

摘要

动脉反射波构成左心室后负荷的主要组成部分。中心增强指数(AIx)是反射波最广泛使用的替代指标。最近的技术发展现在提供了获取主动脉或颈动脉压力波并根据脉搏波分析的各种算法测量 AIx 的能力。本研究的目的是比较 Arteriograph、Complior 和 Mobil-O-Graph 设备测量的 AIx。在 211 名接受诊断心血管评估的个体(年龄 55.1±14.1 岁,67.8%为男性)中,以 5 分钟的间隔随机顺序记录每个设备的记录。所有测量均在仰卧位进行,AIx 通过公式 AIx=100×(增强压)/(脉搏压)计算。进行 Bland-Altman 分析。不同设备之间 AIx 的平均差异(偏差)±差异的一个标准差(具有协议范围)如下:(a)Mobil-O-Graph 与 Complior:-2.1±14.8%(-31.1%至 26.9%),(b)Arteriograph 与 Complior:12.9±14.6%(-15.7%至 41.5%),和(c)Mobil-O-Graph 与 Arteriograph:-10.8±16.9%(-43.9%至 22.3%)。这三种检测设备在中心 AIx 估计方面存在显著差异,这使得这三种设备不能互换用于反射波评估。然而,Mobil-O-Graph 设备在 AIx 测量方面与 Complior 系统的一致性最高(偏差最低)。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
Sex differences in aortic augmentation index in adolescents.青少年主动脉增强指数的性别差异。
J Hypertens. 2017 Oct;35(10):2016-2024. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001425.
6
Pulse wave analysis with two tonometric devices: a comparison study.应用两种测压设备的脉搏波分析:对比研究。
Physiol Meas. 2014 Sep;35(9):1837-48. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/35/9/1837. Epub 2014 Aug 26.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验