Key result
Anatomical and hemodynamic properties of the radial artery differed significantly across the three conventional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations (P < 0.01).
Why the study?
Are there anatomical or hemodynamic differences in the radial artery between traditional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations and nearby non-palpation segments?
Cross-Sectional (n=44)
Are there anatomical or hemodynamic differences in the radial artery between traditional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations and nearby non-palpation segments?
p-value: p=<0.01
Significant anatomical and hemodynamic differences exist at traditional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations compared to nearby segments, potentially explaining their diagnostic use in traditional medicine.
Significant differences at PLs versus non-PLs support site specificity; leaves open whether this explains diagnostic utility in larger studies.
Aim of the Study. The three conventional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations (PLs) on both wrists are Cun, Guan, and Chi, and each location reveals different clinical information. To identify anatomical or hemodynamic specificity, we used ultrasonographic imaging to determine the arterial diameter, radial artery depth, and arterial blood flow velocity at the three PLs and at nearby non-PL segments. Methods. We applied an ultrasound scanner to 44 subjects and studied the changes in the arterial diameter and depth as well as in the average/maximum blood flow velocities along the radial artery at three PLs and three non-PLs located more proximally than Chi. Results. All of the measurements at all of the PLs were significantly different (P < 0.01). Artery depth was significantly different among the non-PLs; however, this difference became insignificant after normalization to the arm circumference. Conclusions. Substantial changes in the hemodynamic and anatomical properties of the radial artery around the three PLs were insignificant at the nearby non-PLs segments. This finding may provide a partial explanation for the diagnostic use of "Cun, Guan, and Chi.".
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2015) reported a cross-sectional. Pulse-diagnostic palpation locations (Cun, Guan, Chi) vs. Nearby non-palpation locations was evaluated on Arterial diameter, radial artery depth, and average/maximum blood flow velocities (p=<0.01). Anatomical and hemodynamic properties of the radial artery differed significantly across the three conventional pulse-diagnostic palpation locations (P < 0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: