Key result
Calibrating radial artery pressure waveforms with brachial MAP/DBP resulted in a 7.5 mmHg higher estimated central systolic blood pressure compared to brachial SBP/DBP calibration in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Why the study?
Correct calibration of peripheral blood pressure waveforms is essential for accurate noninvasive central blood pressure estimation, but the impact of calibration method had not been examined in type 1 diabetes.
Does calibration with brachial MAP/DBP compared to brachial SBP/DBP alter noninvasive central blood pressure estimation in patients with type 1 diabetes?
Cross-Sectional (n=54)
No
Does calibration with brachial MAP/DBP compared to brachial SBP/DBP alter noninvasive central blood pressure estimation in patients with type 1 diabetes?
Mean Difference: 7.5
Absolute Event Rate: 122.5% vs 115%
p-value: p=<0.001
In patients with type 1 diabetes, noninvasive estimation of central blood pressure is highly dependent on the peripheral calibration method, with MAP/DBP calibration yielding significantly higher values that could alter cardiovascular risk stratification.
Peripheral calibration method affects noninvasive central SBP estimates in type 1 diabetes; leaves open optimal approach for risk stratification.
OBJECTIVE: Peripheral blood pressure (BP) waveforms are used for noninvasive central BP estimation. Central BP could assist in cardiovascular risk assessment in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). However, correct calibration of peripheral BP waveforms is important to accurately estimate central BP. We examined differences in central BP estimated by radial artery tonometry depending on which brachial BP (SBP/DBP vs. MAP/DBP) is used for calibration of the radial waveforms, for the first time in T1DM. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in T1DM patients without known cardiovascular disease. Radial artery BP waveforms were acquired using applanation tonometry ( SphygmoCor ) for the estimation of central SBP, central pulse pressure (PP) and central augmentation pressure, using either brachial SBP/DBP or MAP/DBP for the calibration of the radial pressure waveforms. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (age: 46 ± 9.5 years; T1DM duration: 27 ± 8.8 years) were evaluated. Central BP parameters were significantly higher when brachial MAP/DBP-calibration was used compared with brachial SBP/DBP-calibration (7.5 ± 5.04, 7.5 ± 5.04 and 1.5 ± 1.36 mmHg higher central SBP, central PP and central augmentation pressure, respectively, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with T1DM, there are significant differences in central BP values estimated with radial artery tonometry, depending on the method used for calibration of the radial waveforms. Brachial MAP/DBP-calibration resulted in consistently higher central BP as compared to using brachial SBP/DBP, leading to patient re-stratification. Hence, the accuracy of noninvasive estimation of central BP by radial tonometry is dependent on calibration approach, and this problem must be resolved in validation studies using an invasive reference standard to determine which method best estimates true central BP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helleputte et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Type 1 diabetes mellitus (n=54). Brachial MAP/DBP calibration vs. Brachial SBP/DBP calibration was evaluated on Estimated central systolic blood pressure (mmHg) (MD 7.5, p=<0.001). Calibrating radial artery pressure waveforms with brachial MAP/DBP resulted in a 7.5 mmHg higher estimated central systolic blood pressure compared to brachial SBP/DBP calibration in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: