Reproducibility of pulse wave velocity measurements with phase contrast magnetic resonance and applanation tonometry

被引:18
|
作者
Suever, Jonathan D. [1 ,2 ]
Oshinski, John [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Rojas-Campos, Enrique [4 ]
Huneycutt, David [4 ]
Cardarelli, Francesca [4 ]
Stillman, Arthur E. [3 ,4 ]
Raggi, Paolo [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Emory Clin, Wallace H Coulter Dept Biomed Engn, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[2] Georgia Inst Technol, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[3] Emory Clin, Sch Med, Dept Radiol & Imaging Sci, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[4] Emory Clin, Sch Med, Dept Med, Div Cardiol, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING | 2012年 / 28卷 / 05期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Pulse wave velocity; Applanation tonometry; Cross-correlation; Phase contrast magnetic resonance; AORTIC STIFFNESS; ARTERIAL STIFFNESS; BLOOD-PRESSURE; DISTENSIBILITY; IMPACT; AGE; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CALCIFICATION; IMPROVEMENT; ELASTICITY;
D O I
10.1007/s10554-011-9929-8
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Increased aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) results from loss of arterial compliance and is associated with unfavorable outcomes. Applanation tonometry (AT) is the most frequently applied method to assess PWV and deduce aortic compliance. The goal of this study was to compare the reproducibility of PWV measurements obtained with: (1) cross-correlation analysis of phase contrast magnetic resonance (PCMR) velocity data, and (2) applanation tonometry (AT). PWV was measured twice with each modality in 13 normal young volunteers (controls) and 9 older patients who had undergone a CT exam to evaluate coronary artery calcium. The coefficient of variation (CoV) between measurements was computed for each modality. There was no significant difference in PWV values obtained with AT and PCMR in controls or patients. The inter-scan reproducibility of PCMR was superior to AT in the controls (CoV: 3.4 +/- A 2.3% vs. 6.3 +/- A 4.0%, P = 0.03) but not in the older patients (7.4 +/- A 8.0% vs. 9.9 +/- A 9.6%, P = 0.32). PWV values were higher in patients than controls (5.6 +/- A 1.2 vs. 9.7 +/- A 2.8, P = 0.002). PCMR and AT yielded similar values for PWV in patients and volunteers. PCMR showed a superior reproducibility in young subjects but not in older patients.
引用
收藏
页码:1141 / 1146
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Interindividual and intraindividual variation in pulse wave velocity measurements in a male population
    Tripkovic, Laura
    Hart, Kathryn H.
    Frost, Gary S.
    Lodge, John K.
    BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, 2014, 19 (04) : 233 - 241
  • [42] Quantification of Aortic Stiffness Using Magnetic Resonance Elastography: Measurement Reproducibility, Pulse Wave Velocity Comparison, Changes over Cardiac Cycle, and Relationship with Age
    Kenyhercz, William E.
    Raterman, Brian
    Illapani, Venkata Sita Priyanka
    Dowell, Joshua
    Mo, Xiaokui
    White, Richard D.
    Kolipaka, Arunark
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2016, 75 (05) : 1920 - 1926
  • [43] The association between peri-dialytic pulse wave velocity measurements and hemodialysis patient mortality
    Vongsanim, Surachet
    Davenport, Andrew
    HEMODIALYSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 25 (01) : 71 - 77
  • [44] Noninvasive evaluation of varying pulse pressures in vivo using brachial sphymomanometry, applanation tonometry, and Pulse Wave Ultrasound Manometry
    Ronny X. Li
    Ada Ip
    Elena Sanz-Miralles
    Elisa E. Konofagou
    Artery Research, 2017, 18 : 22 - 28
  • [45] Repeatability of Different Segmental Pulse Wave Velocity Measurements
    Papaioannou, Theodore G.
    Stamatelopoulos, Kimon
    Tousoulis, Dimitrios
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2016, 29 (07) : 889 - 889
  • [46] Indices of cardiovascular function derived from peripheral pulse wave analysis using radial applanation tonometry: a measurement repeatability study
    Crilly, Mike
    Coch, Christoph
    Bruce, Margaret
    Clark, Hazel
    Williams, David
    VASCULAR MEDICINE, 2007, 12 (03) : 189 - 197
  • [47] Regional assessment of carotid artery pulse wave velocity using compressed sensing accelerated high temporal resolution 2D CINE phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance
    Peper, Eva S.
    Strijkers, Gustav J.
    Gazzola, Katja
    Potters, Wouter V.
    Motaal, Abdallah G.
    Luirink, Ilse K.
    Hutten, Barbara A.
    Wiegman, Albert
    van Ooij, Pim
    van den Born, Bert-Jan H.
    Nederveen, Aart J.
    Coolen, Bram F.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2018, 20
  • [48] Non-invasive measurement of aortic pressure in patients: Comparing pulse wave analysis and applanation tonometry
    Naidu, M. U. R.
    Reddy, C. Prabhakar
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY, 2012, 44 (02) : 230 - 233
  • [49] Accuracy and Repeatability of Fourier Velocity Encoded M-Mode and Two-Dimensional Cine Phase Contrast for Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement in the Descending Aorta
    Taviani, Valentina
    Patterson, Andrew J.
    Graves, Martin J.
    Hardy, Christopher J.
    Worters, Pauline
    Sutcliffe, Michael P. F.
    Gillard, Jonathan H.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2010, 31 (05) : 1185 - 1194
  • [50] Comparison of different methods for the estimation of aortic pulse wave velocity from 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance
    Houriez-Gombaud-Saintonge, Sophia
    Mousseaux, Elie
    Bargiotas, Ioannis
    De Cesare, Alain
    Dietenbeck, Thomas
    Bouaou, Kevin
    Redheuil, Alban
    Soulat, Gilles
    Giron, Alain
    Gencer, Umit
    Craiem, Damian
    Messas, Emmanuel
    Bollache, Emilie
    Chenoune, Yasmina
    Kachenoura, Nadjia
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2019, 21 (01)