Why the study?
Does MAP-CSBP calibration better discriminate cardiac structural abnormalities compared to Stan-CSBP in community-based patients with risk factors?
Does MAP-CSBP calibration better discriminate cardiac structural abnormalities compared to Stan-CSBP in community-based patients with risk factors?
Central systolic blood pressure derived using oscillometric MAP and DBP calibration provides better discrimination for cardiac structural abnormalities like LVH and LAD than standard calibration.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
MAP calibration may enhance detection of LVH and LA enlargement; leaves open validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: Central blood pressure (CBP) independently predicts cardiovascular risk, but calibration methods may affect accuracy of central systolic blood pressure (CSBP). Standard central systolic blood pressure (Stan-CSBP) from peripheral waveforms is usually derived with calibration using brachial SBP and diastolic BP (DBP). However, calibration using oscillometric mean arterial pressure (MAP) and DBP (MAP-CSBP) is purported to provide more accurate representation of true invasive CSBP. This study sought to determine which derived CSBP could more accurately discriminate cardiac structural abnormalities. METHODS: A total of 349 community-based patients with risk factors (71±5years, 161 males) had CSBP measured by brachial oscillometry (Mobil-O-Graph, IEM GmbH, Stolberg, Germany) using 2 calibration methods: MAP-CSBP and Stan-CSBP. Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and left atrial dilatation (LAD) were measured based on standard guidelines. RESULTS: MAP-CSBP was higher than Stan-CSBP (149±20 vs. 128±15mm Hg, P < 0.0001). Although they were modestly correlated (rho = 0.74, P < 0.001), the Bland-Altman plot demonstrated a large bias (21mm Hg) and limits of agreement (24mm Hg). In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses, MAP-CSBP significantly better discriminated LVH compared with Stan-CSBP (area under the curve (AUC) 0.66 vs. 0.59, P = 0.0063) and brachial SBP (0.62, P = 0.027). Continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) (P < 0.001) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) (P < 0.001) corroborated superior discrimination of LVH by MAP-CSBP. Similarly, MAP-CSBP better distinguished LAD than Stan-CSBP (AUC 0.63 vs. 0.56, P = 0.005) and conventional brachial SBP (0.58, P = 0.006), whereas Stan-CSBP provided no better discrimination than conventional brachial BP (P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: CSBP is calibration dependent and when oscillometric MAP and DBP are used, the derived CSBP is a better discriminator for cardiac structural abnormalities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Negishi et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: