PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 1, 1990Clinical Science79 citations

Aortic compliance measured by non-invasive Doppler ultrasound: Description of a method and its reproducibility

View Full Paper
JWJ. S. WrightJCJ.K. CruickshankSKS. Kontis

Structured PICO

Is non-invasive Doppler ultrasound a reproducible method for measuring aortic compliance?

P
Population
53 subjects (30 subjects aged 60 +/- 7 years for 1-month assessment, and 23 different subjects aged 59 +/- 8 years for 3-month assessment)
I
Intervention
Measurement of aortic compliance using two continuous wave Doppler ultrasound transducers
O
Outcome
Reproducibility of aortic compliance measurement at 1 month and 3 monthssurrogate

Non-invasive Doppler ultrasound provides a reproducible method for measuring aortic compliance over 1 to 3 months.

Abstract

Aortic compliance (expressed as percentage increase in lumen diameter for a pulse pressure of 10 mmHg) was calculated from the characteristic pulse wave velocity deduced from 'foot to foot' transit times of the blood flow pulse over a measured length of aorta. Two continuous wave Doppler ultrasound transducers were used: one insonating the root of the left subclavian artery, the other the abdominal aorta proximal to its bifurcation. Measurements were made after the subject had been supine for 5 min to achieve stable conditions. 2. Transit times were calculated on-line in real-time from the delay between the start of the systolic upstroke in the flow velocity sonograms recorded by the two transducers. 3. Within-visit variation was minimized by measuring over 45 cardiac cycles repeated three separate times and calculating an overall mean value for aortic compliance. A full measurement took 5-10 min. 4. Reproducibility of this overall mean value of aortic compliance was assessed at 1 month in 30 subjects (aged 60 +/- 7 years, mean +/- SD) and at 3 months in 23 different subjects (59 +/- 8 years). Aortic compliance values ranged from 0.1 to 2.0%/10 mmHg. 5. The mean paired difference between aortic compliance values was -0.02 between 0 and 1 months, and 0.03 between 0 and 3 months, with respective 95% confidence limits of -0.06 to 0.03 and -0.03 to 0.09 embracing zero, thus not differing significantly from baseline.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Wright et al. (1990) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a11c71d81e48c4370dcd2bchttps://doi.org/10.1042/cs0780463
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Systemic compliance: does it play a role in the genesis of essential hypertension?1984 · 142 citations
  2. 2Arterial Compliance in Systolic Hypertension1982 · 30 citations
  3. 3Effect of Arterial Compliance on Systolic Blood Pressure and Cardiac Function1982 · 22 citations
  4. 4Doppler Ultrasound Recognition of Preclinical Changes in Arterial Wall in Diabetic Subjects: Compliance and Pulse-Wave Damping1986 · 59 citations
  5. 5Mechanical Properties of Arteries in Vivo1960 · 686 citations