July 24, 2014Open Access
Arterial stiffness estimation in healthy subjects: a validation of oscillometric (Arteriograph) and tonometric (SphygmoCor) techniques
Key Result
Arteriograph yielded significantly higher aortic pulse wave velocity values (8.00±2.16 m/s) compared to SphygmoCor (6.87±1.47 m/s, p<0.001) in healthy subjects, highlighting the need to use the same technique for repeated studies.
Study Design
Type
Cross-Sectional (n=63)
Multicenter
No
Structured PICO
Does the oscillometric Arteriograph technique compare favorably with the tonometric SphygmoCor method for estimating arterial stiffness in healthy subjects?
P
Population
63 healthy non-smoking adults aged 20-69 years without cardiovascular disease underwent arterial stiffness measurements to compare Arteriograph and SphygmoCor techniques.
E
Exposure
Oscillometric Arteriograph (AG) technique for measuring arterial stiffness
C
Comparator
Tonometric SphygmoCor (SC) method for measuring arterial stiffness
O
Outcome
Aortic pulse wave velocity (PWVao) and augmentation index (AIx) and their associations with carotid ultrasound measures and traditional risk indicatorssurrogate
Arterial stiffness indices measured by Arteriograph and SphygmoCor correlate well in healthy subjects, but Arteriograph yields higher values, necessitating the use of the same technique for repeated measurements.
Main Result
Absolute Event Rate: 8% vs 6.87%
p-value: p=<0.001
Limitations
- Lack of comparison with invasive methods
- Relatively small number of subjects
- Different relations between the techniques might be obtained in atherosclerotic or hypertensive patients
Abstract
Arterial stiffness is an important cardiovascular risk marker, which can be measured noninvasively with different techniques. To validate such techniques in healthy subjects, we compared the recently introduced oscillometric Arteriograph (AG) technique with the tonometric SphygmoCor (SC) method and their associations with carotid ultrasound measures and traditional risk indicators. Sixty-three healthy subjects aged 20-69 (mean 48 ± 15) years were included. We measured aortic pulse wave velocity (PWVao) and augmentation index (AIx) by AG and SC, and with SC also the PWVao standardized to 80% of the direct distance between carotid and femoral sites (St-PWVaoSC). The carotid strain, stiffness index and intima-media thickness (cIMTmean) were evaluated by ultrasound. PWVaoAG (8.00 ± 2.16 m s(-1)) was higher (P<0.001) than PWVaoSC (6.87 ± 1.47 m s(-1)), but did not differ from St-PWVaoSC (7.68 ± 1.58 m s(-1)), and correlated (P<0.001) with both (r = 0.54 and 0.59). St-PWVaoSC was significantly (P < 0.01) higher than PWVaoAG for values below median (7.4 m s(-1)). PWVao by SC and AG differed significantly in females (P<0.001), but not in males (P=0.40). AIxaoAG (27.5 ± 14.5%) was higher (P < 0.001) than AIxaoSC (20.5 ± 17.4%), but related closely (r=0.97, P<0.001). St-PWVaoSC, PWVao and AIxao by SC, and PWVao and AIxao by AG were all related to serum cholesterol and to cIMTmean (P<0.001). Arterial stiffness indices by AG and SC correlate with vascular risk markers in healthy subjects. AIxao results by AG and SC are closely interrelated, but higher values are obtained by AG. In the lower range, PWVao values by AG and SC are similar, but differ for higher values. Our results imply the necessity to apply one and the same technique for repeated studies.