Why the study?
Do augmentation index measurements derived from different peripheral and central devices correlate in healthy subjects?
Do augmentation index measurements derived from different peripheral and central devices correlate in healthy subjects?
Different devices measuring augmentation index at various arterial sites show high correlation, although absolute values differ, suggesting they track similar physiological properties but cannot be used interchangeably.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Augmentation index from different devices should not be interchanged clinically; leaves open need for standardization and validation studies.
One of the most commonly evaluated features of the arterial pressure waveforms is augmentation index (AI).Multiple devices have been developed and marketed that measure AI at peripheral arteries.Currently, it is not known if and how these measures of AI are related.Aortic and radial AI (using SphygmoCor), radial AI (Omron), and finger AI (Itamar) were measured in 40 apparently healthy subjects.All the AI values were correlated with each other with Pearson r-values ranging from 0.78 to 0.94.The coefficients of variation ranged from 3.4 to 20.0%.We concluded that even though the absolute values derived by each technique were different, there were high and significant correlations between AI values.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dhindsa et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: