Key result
Foot-to-foot time delay methods accurately predicted catheter separation (measured 1.43 cm vs intercept 1.40 +/- 0.5 cm; P=NS) and were highly reproducible compared to transfer function methods.
p-value: p=not significant
In a rat model, the foot-to-foot time delay method is more accurate and reproducible for measuring aortic pulse-wave velocity compared to the pressure-pressure transfer function method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Foot-to-foot PWV methods are reliable in rats; leaves open translation to human aortic stiffness assessment.
Mitchell et al. (1997) studied Spontaneously hypertensive rats. Foot-to-foot time delay method vs. Pressure-pressure transfer function method was evaluated on Accuracy and reproducibility of predicting separation between catheters (p=not significant). Foot-to-foot time delay methods accurately predicted catheter separation (measured 1.43 cm vs intercept 1.40 +/- 0.5 cm; P=NS) and were highly reproducible compared to transfer function methods.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: