Why the study?
Does a novel ultrasound motion tracking algorithm for carotid artery longitudinal motion correlate with arterial stiffness measured by applanation tonometry in healthy subjects?
Does a novel ultrasound motion tracking algorithm for carotid artery longitudinal motion correlate with arterial stiffness measured by applanation tonometry in healthy subjects?
Novel ultrasound-derived longitudinal motion parameters of the carotid artery show potential as indices of arterial stiffness.
Novel carotid motion indices may reflect stiffness in healthy subjects; leaves open validation and clinical utility.
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal wall motion of carotid artery is a useful but challenging parameter to measure. In this study, we tested our previously published motion tracking algorithm and validated our method against applanation tonometry measurements. METHODS AND RESULTS: We measured the two-dimensional carotid artery wall motion from 19 healthy subjects and, as a reference, performed applanation tonometry measurements in parallel with the ultrasound study. The results show that peak velocities (R = -0·484; P<0·05) and accelerations (R = -0·524; P<0·05) of the longitudinal motion between intima and adventitia layers exhibit a greater correlation with the arterial stiffness parameters, for example the augmentation index than the corresponding amplitude of the longitudinal motion (R = -0·132; P>0·05). The amplitudes of the longitudinal motion, between intima and adventitia, are related more to the physical size of the subject, as they correlated significantly with the height (R = 0·597; P<0·01) and weight (R = 0·562; P<0·05) of the subject as well as the cross-sectional dimension of the measured artery (R = 0·611; P<0·01). Furthermore, two new indices have been introduced, Polydeg and RAlength, with which to study the shape of the longitudinal motion curve; both parameters displayed significant correlation with arterial stiffness, for example augmentation index (R = 0·468; P<0·05 and R = 0·609; P<0·01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The new longitudinal motion parameters presented here displayed clear potential to be used as novel stiffness indices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yli‐Ollila et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: