Marcus R H, Korcarz C, McCray G, Neumann A, Murphy M, Borow K, Weinert L, Bednarz J, Gretler D D, Spencer K T
Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, IL 60637.
Circulation. 1994 Jun;89(6):2688-99. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.89.6.2688.
The Poiseuillian model of the arterial system currently applied in clinical physiology does not explain how arterial pressure is maintained during diastole after cessation of pulsatile aortic inflow. Arterial pressure-flow relations can be more accurately described by models that incorporate arterial viscoelastic properties such as arterial compliance. Continuous pressure and flow measurements are needed to evaluate these properties. Since the techniques used to date to acquire such data have been invasive, physiological models of the circulation that incorporate these properties have not been widely applied in the clinical setting. The purpose of this study was (1) to validate noninvasive methods for continuous measurement of central arterial pressure and flow and (2) to determine normal reference values for arterial compliance using physiological models of the circulation applied to the noninvasively acquired pressure and flow data.
Simultaneously acquired invasive and noninvasive aortic pressures (30 patients), flows (8 patients), and arterial mechanical properties (8 patients) were compared. Pressure was measured by high-fidelity catheter aortic micromanometer (invasive) and calibrated subclavian pulse tracing (noninvasive). Aortic inflow was determined from thermodilution-calibrated electromagnetic flow velocity data (invasive) and echo-Doppler data (noninvasive). Arterial compliance was determined for two- and three-element windkessel models of the circulation using the area method and an iterative procedure, respectively. Once validated, the noninvasive methodology was used to determine normal compliance values for a reference population of 70 subjects (age range, 20 to 81 years) with normal 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures and without Doppler-echocardiographic evidence for structural heart disease. The limits of agreement between invasive and noninvasive pressure data, compared at 10% intervals during ejection and nonejection, were narrow over a wide range of pressures, with no significant differences between methods. Invasive and noninvasive instantaneous aortic inflow values differed slightly but significantly at the start of ejection (P < .05), but during the latter 90% of ejection, values for the two methods were similar, with narrow limits of agreement. Total vascular resistance and arterial compliance values derived from invasive and noninvasive data were similar. Arterial compliance values for the normal population using the two-element model (C2E) ranged from 0.74 to 2.44 cm3/mm Hg (mean, 1.57 +/- 0.38 cm3/mm Hg), with a beat-to-beat variability of 5.2 +/- 3.9%. C2E decreased with increasing age (r = -.73, P < .001) and tended to be higher in men (1.67 +/- 0.41 cm3/mm Hg) than in women (1.51 +/- 0.35 cm3/mm Hg, P = .07). Compliance values for the three-element model (C3E) were predictably smaller than for the two-element model (mean, 1.23 +/- 0.30; range, 0.59 to 2.16 cm3/mm Hg, P < .001 versus C2E) but correlated with C2E values (r = .81, P < .001) and were also inversely related to age (r = -.56, P < .001). Ridge regression and principal component analyses both showed the compliance value to be a composite function whose variation could be best predicted by consideration of simultaneous values for five major hemodynamic determinants: heart rate, mean flow, mean aortic pressure, minimal diastolic pressure, and end-systolic pressure. Multivariate analysis revealed age and sex to be independent predictors of compliance (P < .01 for both). There were no differences in compliance between black and white subjects.
Noninvasive methods can be used to acquire the hemodynamic data necessary for clinical application of physiological models of the circulation that incorporate arterial viscoelastic properties such as arterial compliance. The strong inverse linear relation between model-based compliance estimates and age mandates incorporation of this demographic parameter in
目前临床生理学中应用的动脉系统泊肃叶模型无法解释在搏动性主动脉流入停止后的舒张期动脉压是如何维持的。结合动脉黏弹性特性(如动脉顺应性)的模型能更准确地描述动脉压力-流量关系。需要进行连续的压力和流量测量来评估这些特性。由于迄今为止用于获取此类数据的技术具有侵入性,因此结合这些特性的循环生理模型尚未在临床环境中广泛应用。本研究的目的是:(1)验证用于连续测量中心动脉压和流量的非侵入性方法;(2)使用应用于非侵入性获取的压力和流量数据的循环生理模型确定动脉顺应性的正常参考值。
比较了同时获取的侵入性和非侵入性主动脉压力(30例患者)、流量(8例患者)以及动脉力学特性(8例患者)。压力通过高保真导管主动脉微压计(侵入性)和校准的锁骨下脉搏描记法(非侵入性)进行测量。主动脉流入量由热稀释校准的电磁流速数据(侵入性)和超声多普勒数据(非侵入性)确定。分别使用面积法和迭代程序为循环的二元和三元风箱模型确定动脉顺应性。经验证后,使用非侵入性方法为70名24小时动态血压正常且无多普勒超声心动图证据显示结构性心脏病的受试者(年龄范围20至81岁)的参考人群确定正常顺应性值。在射血期和非射血期以10%的间隔比较时,侵入性和非侵入性压力数据之间的一致性界限在很宽的压力范围内都很窄,两种方法之间无显著差异。侵入性和非侵入性瞬时主动脉流入值在射血开始时略有差异但具有统计学意义(P <.05),但在射血的后90%期间,两种方法的值相似,一致性界限很窄。从侵入性和非侵入性数据得出的总血管阻力和动脉顺应性值相似。使用二元模型(C2E)得出的正常人群的动脉顺应性值范围为0.74至2.44 cm³/mm Hg(平均值,1.57±0.38 cm³/mm Hg),逐搏变异性为5.2±3.9%。C2E随年龄增加而降低(r = -.73,P <.001),并且男性(1.67±0.41 cm³/mm Hg)往往高于女性(1.51±0.35 cm³/mm Hg,P =.07)。三元模型(C3E)的顺应性值预计比二元模型小(平均值,1.23±0.30;范围,0.59至2.16 cm³/mm Hg,与C2E相比P <.001),但与C2E值相关(r =.81,P <.001),并且也与年龄呈负相关(r = -.56,P <.001)。岭回归和主成分分析均表明顺应性值是一个复合函数,通过考虑五个主要血流动力学决定因素的同时值可以最好地预测其变化:心率、平均流量、平均主动脉压、最小舒张压和收缩末期压力。多变量分析显示年龄和性别是顺应性的独立预测因素(两者P均<.01)。黑人和白人受试者之间的顺应性无差异。
非侵入性方法可用于获取结合动脉黏弹性特性(如动脉顺应性)的循环生理模型临床应用所需的血流动力学数据。基于模型的顺应性估计值与年龄之间强烈的负线性关系要求在……中纳入这一人口统计学参数