What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Other. Intervention: Ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system with indirect blood-pressure measurement vs. Direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurement. Primary outcome: Reproducibility (intra-observer and inter-observer variability) of pulsatile diameter changes, pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep), and stiffness (beta).

What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate the reproducibility of an ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system for measuring pulsatile arterial diameter changes, and to assess the impact of indirect versus direct blood pressure measurements on calculated arterial stiffness.

November 1, 1993Clinical Physiology

Non‐invasive measurement of pulsatile vessel diameter change and elastic properties in human arteries: a methodological study,

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Ultrasound echo-tracking with indirect BP underestimates elastic properties by ~28% versus direct arterial measurement.

Why the study?

Does an ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system provide reproducible measurements of pulsatile vessel diameter changes and elastic properties in human arteries?

Population

Human subjects

Comparison

Ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system… vs Direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurement

Design

Other

Authors

FHF. HansenUniversity of Wales Institute Cardiff DBDavid BergqvistVascular / Pulmonary Vascular PMPeter MangellLund University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Requires caution with indirect BP in echo-tracking stiffness measures; leaves open validation against direct intra-arterial readings.

Key Points

To evaluate the reproducibility of an ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system for measuring pulsatile arterial diameter changes, and to assess the impact of indirect versus direct blood pressure measurements on calculated arterial stiffness.
Measured pulsatile vessel diameter changes noninvasively using an ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system in the human abdominal aorta, common carotid artery, and common femoral artery.
Evaluated the accuracy of indirect non-invasive blood pressure readings against simultaneous intra-arterial blood pressure measurements to calculate pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep) and stiffness (beta).
Determined intra-observer and inter-observer variabilities for pulsatile diameter changes, blood pressure measurements, and derived arterial elasticity indices.
Intra-observer variabilities for pulsatile diameter changes were 16% in the abdominal aorta, 10% in the common carotid artery, and 15% in the common femoral artery; corresponding intra-observer variabilities for Ep and beta were 21%, 17%, and 18%, respectively.
Indirect blood pressure demonstrated low variability (2% systolic, 3% diastolic) and minimal error for systolic readings, but systematically overestimated diastolic blood pressure by an average of 20% relative to direct intra-arterial measurements.
Inter-observer variability in the common carotid artery was 10% for diameter changes, 21% for Ep, and 23% for beta, resulting in a systematic underestimation of Ep and beta by 25% to 30% when indirect blood pressure measurements were utilized.

Structured PICO

Does an ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system provide reproducible measurements of pulsatile vessel diameter changes and elastic properties in human arteries?

Population

Human subjects

Exposure

Ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system combined with indirect blood pressure measurement

Comparator

Direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurement

Outcome

Reproducibility (intra- and inter-observer variability) of pulsatile diameter changes, pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep), and stiffness (beta)surrogate

The ultrasound echo-tracking system provides reliable measurements of arterial stiffness, though reliance on indirect blood pressure measurements causes systematic underestimation of elastic modulus and stiffness.

Limitations

Pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep) and stiffness (beta) are systematically underestimated by 25-30% when used in combination with indirect blood pressure measurements.
Indirect blood pressure measurement systematically overestimated the diastolic blood pressure, on average by 20%.

Cite This Study

Hansen et al. (1993) studied this question. Ultrasound phase-locked echo-tracking system with indirect blood-pressure measurement vs. Direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurement was evaluated on Reproducibility (intra-observer and inter-observer variability) of pulsatile diameter changes, pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep), and stiffness (beta). The ultrasound echo-tracking system demonstrated intra-observer variabilities of 10-16% for pulsatile diameter changes, but systematically underestimated elastic properties by 25-30% with indirect BP.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa279ddeb5cc5d2cba584e3 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-097x.1993.tb00478.x

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Non‐invasive measurement of pulsatile vessel diameter change and elastic properties in human arteries: a methodological study,

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Non‐invasive measurement of pulsatile vessel diameter change and elastic properties in human arteries: a methodological study,

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider