Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
P61 Comparison of Two Oscillometric Technics for Measuring Pulse Wave Velocity
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
P61 Comparison of Two Oscillometric Technics for Measuring Pulse Wave Velocity
Do you wish to request the book?
P61 Comparison of Two Oscillometric Technics for Measuring Pulse Wave Velocity
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
P61 Comparison of Two Oscillometric Technics for Measuring Pulse Wave Velocity
2019
Overview
It has been proven that aortic pulse wave velocity (aoPWV), the measure of arterial stiffness is a strong and independent predictor of both cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Beyond the “gold standard” cfPWV (carotid-femoral) a plenty of methods are available for measuring PWV but the interpretation of their results are problematic and not interchangeable.
Patients and Methods
Our aim was to assess the association and agreement of two oscillometric methods; the upper armcuffed invasively validated Arteriograph system and the brachial-ankle PWV (baPVW) measurement employed by the automatic BOSO-ABI system which operates simultaneous cuff-measurements on both extremities. 157 apparently healthy individuals of both sexes (mean age was 44.3 + 9.3 ys; 54 male and 103 female) were examined in this study.
Results
Mean PWV was significantly higher with BOSO (11.76 + 1.52 m/s) than Arteriograph (8.45 + 1.71 m/s). The two different measurement modalities demonstrated moderate linear correlation (The Pearson’s test of correlation coefficient
r
= 0.391,
p
< 0.001). The lack of agreement between the two methods is confirmed also by the Bland-Altman plot.
Conclusion
Both methods are simple and easy to use and offer a user independent automatic assessment of PWV. The difference of the measured values derived from the different path length the two methods use.
Publisher
Springer Netherlands,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
