Artery Research

Volume 16, Issue C, December 2016, Pages 73 - 73

10.8 SYSTOLIC AORTIC PRESSURE DERIVED FROM DIFFERENT CALIBRATION METHODS IN THE GENERAL POPULATION

Authors
Siegfried Wassertheurer1, Bernhard Hametner1, Christopher Mayer1, Ahmed Hafez2, Thomas Weber2
1Austrian Institute of Technology, Vienna, Austria
2Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, Wels, Austria
Available Online 24 November 2016.
DOI
10.1016/j.artres.2016.10.086How to use a DOI?
Abstract

Background: There is recent evidence from different research groups that accuracy [1] and prognostic value [2,3,4] of systolic aortic pressure significantly depends on the method of calibration. Although these results consistently show superiority of mean pressure calibration (aSBP2) over both, traditional calibrated aortic systolic (aSBP1) and brachial systolic pressure (bSBP), the investigated cohorts were relatively small and it is still unclear whether the observed associations between pressures are preserved in the general population.

Objective: Therefore the objective of this work is the investigation of associations between different methods of systolic pressure assessment it a large cohort and its comparison to reported outcome.

Methods: During a public health campaign cardiovascular hemodynamic data was assessed using the Mobil-O-Graph® device and ARCSolver® algorithms in a kiosk like setting. Systolic aortic pressure was derived from two different calibrations: systolic and diastolic pressure and mean and diastolic pressure. Furthermore brachial pressures, age, sex and anthropometric data were recorded and regression analysis was performed to investigate associations.

Results: Summary statistics of 7409 valid measurements are reported in Table 1. Systolic and subsequent pulse pressures significantly differed from bSPB for aSBP1 but not for aSBP2. Regression analysis unveiled that aSBP2 (R2=0.853) is significantly (p<0.00001) less associated with bSBP than aSBP1 (R2=0.937), see Figure 1.

Conclusions: Comparison of our data with literature suggests that unlike aSBP1 [5] the association between bSBP and aSBP2 is only slightly influenced by increased sample size [2] and therefore prognostic superiority over bSBP is likely to be sustainable and warrants further investigation.

Male Female


N Median 2.5 – 97.5 P N Median 2.5 – 97.5 P
Age 2276 54,000 24,000 to 83,000 5133 54,000 20,000 to 81,000
aSBP1 2276 120,803 98,754 to 153,254 5133 114,872 91,723 to 152,578
aSBP2 2276 133,102 108,651 to 172,962 5133 124,914 100,692 to 167,257
SBP 2276 131,000 107,000 to 168,000 5133 124,000 100,000 to 165,000
MBP 2276 106,000 85,000 to 133,000 5133 99,000 79,000 to 129,000
DBP 2276 84,000 63,000 to 109,000 5133 77,000 58,000 to 102,175
BMI 2276 26,219 20,065 to 35,774 5133 23,875 18,218 to 36,634

Regression between bSBP, aSBP1 and aSBP2 respectively.

Summary statistics

Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Download article (PDF)
View full text (HTML)

Journal
Artery Research
Volume-Issue
16 - C
Pages
73 - 73
Publication Date
2016/11/24
ISSN (Online)
1876-4401
ISSN (Print)
1872-9312
DOI
10.1016/j.artres.2016.10.086How to use a DOI?
Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Cite this article

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Siegfried Wassertheurer
AU  - Bernhard Hametner
AU  - Christopher Mayer
AU  - Ahmed Hafez
AU  - Thomas Weber
PY  - 2016
DA  - 2016/11/24
TI  - 10.8 SYSTOLIC AORTIC PRESSURE DERIVED FROM DIFFERENT CALIBRATION METHODS IN THE GENERAL POPULATION
JO  - Artery Research
SP  - 73
EP  - 73
VL  - 16
IS  - C
SN  - 1876-4401
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2016.10.086
DO  - 10.1016/j.artres.2016.10.086
ID  - Wassertheurer2016
ER  -