Key result
The ambulatory arterial stiffness index demonstrated considerably lower repeatability than pulse pressure (ICC 0.38 vs. 0.90; difference 0.51, 95% CI 0.25-0.82) in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Why the study?
Does the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) have comparable repeatability to pulse pressure as a measure of arterial stiffness in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus?
Observational (n=28)
No
Does the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) have comparable repeatability to pulse pressure as a measure of arterial stiffness in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus?
Mean Difference: 0.51 (95% CI 0.25–0.82)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.38% vs 0.9%
AASI has low repeatability compared with pulse pressure in type 1 diabetic patients, questioning its potential implementation in daily clinical practice as a measure of arterial stiffness.
AASI's poor repeatability in type 1 diabetes cautions against clinical use; leaves open its validity as stiffness index pending validation.
OBJECTIVES: The ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) has been proposed as a novel indirect measure of arterial stiffness. We compared the repeatability of AASI and pulse pressure (PP), another marker of arterial stiffness, both computed from repeat 24-h ambulatory blood pressure recordings in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and no previous or present treatment with antihypertensive drugs were recruited from outpatient clinics in Aarhus County and underwent two 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurements, performed within 2 weeks in all participants except one. The repeatability of AASI and PP was assessed by (i) the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and (ii) the percentage of maximal variation, i.e. two times SD of the difference in the percentage of four times the SD of the mean of the paired measurements. RESULTS: The repeatability of AASI was considerably lower than for PP as estimated by ICC (0.38 vs. 0.90). The difference between ICCPP and ICCAASI was 0.51 confidence interval (0.25-0.82). Similarly, percentage of maximal variation was 68 and 23% respectively. CONCLUSION: AASI has a low repeatability compared with PP in type 1 diabetic patients. This questions the potential implementation of AASI in the daily clinic as a measure of arterial stiffness. Further studies are necessary to clarify this.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laugesen et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Type 1 diabetes mellitus (n=28). Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) vs. Pulse pressure (PP) was evaluated on Repeatability assessed by Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) (Difference 0.51, 95% CI 0.25-0.82). The ambulatory arterial stiffness index demonstrated considerably lower repeatability than pulse pressure (ICC 0.38 vs. 0.90; difference 0.51, 95% CI 0.25-0.82) in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: