The simplified tube-load model for calculating carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity demonstrated better repeatability (ICC = 0.985) and accuracy (deviation of 0.13 m/s) compared to existing methods.
Observational (n=57)
Does a simplified tube-load model improve the accuracy, repeatability, and robustness of carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity measurement compared to existing methods in human subjects?
A simplified tube-load model for calculating carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity demonstrates superior repeatability, accuracy, and robustness compared to conventional methods, potentially improving non-invasive arterial stiffness assessment.
Abstract Arterial stiffness, as measured by pulse wave velocity, for the early non-invasive screening of cardiovascular disease is becoming ever more widely used and is an independent prognostic indicator for a variety of pathologies including arteriosclerosis. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) is regarded as the gold standard for aortic stiffness. Existing algorithms for cfPWV estimation have been shown to have good repeatability and accuracy, however, further assessment is needed, especially when signal quality is compromised. We propose a method for calculating cfPWV based on a simplified tube-load model, which allows for the propagation and reflection of the pulse wave. In-vivo cfPWV measurements from 57 subjects and numerical cfPWV data based on a one-dimensional model were used to assess the method and its performance was compared to three other existing approaches (waveform matching, intersecting tangent, and cross-correlation). The cfPWV calculated using the simplified tube-load model had better repeatability than the other methods (Intra-group Correlation Coefficient, ICC = 0.985). The model was also more accurate than other methods (deviation, 0.13 ms −1 ) and was more robust when dealing with noisy signals. We conclude that the determination of cfPWV based on the proposed model can accurately and robustly evaluate arterial stiffness.
Xu et al. (Fri,) conducted a observational in Arterial stiffness (n=57). Simplified tube-load model for cfPWV calculation vs. Waveform matching, intersecting tangent, and cross-correlation methods was evaluated on Repeatability of cfPWV measurement (Intra-class Correlation Coefficient). The simplified tube-load model for calculating carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity demonstrated better repeatability (ICC = 0.985) and accuracy (deviation of 0.13 m/s) compared to existing methods.