8.2 COMPARISON OF THREE DIFFERENT METHODS TO CALCULATE AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY (PWV) USING A 1D MODEL OF THE SYSTEMIC CIRCULATION

B. Trachet; P. Reymond; J. Kips; A. Swillens; M. De Buyzere; B. Suys; N. Stergiopulos; P. Segers

doi:10.1016/j.artres.2009.10.174

<Previous Article In Issue

Next Article In Issue>

Volume 3, Issue 4, December 2009, Pages 159 - 159

8.2 COMPARISON OF THREE DIFFERENT METHODS TO CALCULATE AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY (PWV) USING A 1D MODEL OF THE SYSTEMIC CIRCULATION

Authors

B. Trachet¹, P. Reymond², J. Kips¹, A. Swillens¹, M. De Buyzere³, B. Suys⁴, N. Stergiopulos², P. Segers¹

¹bioMMeda, Institute Biomedical Technology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

²Laboratory of Hemodynamics and Cardiovascular Technology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland

³Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

⁴Department of Pediatrics, Antwerp University, Belgium

Available Online 3 December 2009.

DOI: 10.1016/j.artres.2009.10.174 How to use a DOI?
Abstract: Aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a measure of the stiffness of the large arteries, and is often used as indicator of clinical cardiovascular risk. Yet, methodological issues still exist on how PWV should best be measured. We have used a 1D arterial network computer model of the systemic circulation to compare three different methods to determine aortic PWV: PWV_car-fem (∼ carotid-femoral PWV, the current clinical gold standard method), PWV_ATG (∼ PWV computed with a new device called Arteriograph, making use of only one brachial pressure recording) and PWV_theor (∼ theoretical PWV according to the Bramwell-Hill equation). Different model parameters such as arterial distensibility, terminal resistance (R), cardiac contractility (Emax) and duration of the heart cycle (HC) were varied to obtain in total 42 different simulations. We found a good correlation between PWV_theor and PWV_car-fem (R²=0.95) or PWV_ATG (R²=0.94) but the latter were systematically lower than PWV_theor (with 1.08±0.70m/s for PWV_car-fem and 2.17±0.42m/s for PWV_ATG respectively). For both methods, Bland-Altman plots showed that the underestimation increases for higher values of PWV (figure not shown). Comparing PWV_car-fem with PWV_ATG, both methods correlate well (R²=0.90), with PWVcar-fem being on average 1.09±0.48m/s higher than PWV_ATG. In conclusion, in our computer model study, both the carotid-femoral PWV and the Arteriograph method provide values that correlate well to aortic PWV, but the actual values are lower than the theoretical ones following from the Bramwell-Hill formula.
Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Download article (PDF)
View full text (HTML)

<Previous Article In Issue

Next Article In Issue>

Journal: Artery Research
Volume-Issue: 3 - 4
Pages: 159 - 159
Publication Date: 2009/12/03
ISSN (Online): 1876-4401
ISSN (Print): 1872-9312
DOI: 10.1016/j.artres.2009.10.174 How to use a DOI?
Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license.

Cite this article

ris enw bib

TY  - JOUR
AU  - B. Trachet
AU  - P. Reymond
AU  - J. Kips
AU  - A. Swillens
AU  - M. De Buyzere
AU  - B. Suys
AU  - N. Stergiopulos
AU  - P. Segers
PY  - 2009
DA  - 2009/12/03
TI  - 8.2 COMPARISON OF THREE DIFFERENT METHODS TO CALCULATE AORTIC PULSE WAVE VELOCITY (PWV) USING A 1D MODEL OF THE SYSTEMIC CIRCULATION
JO  - Artery Research
SP  - 159
EP  - 159
VL  - 3
IS  - 4
SN  - 1876-4401
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2009.10.174
DO  - 10.1016/j.artres.2009.10.174
ID  - Trachet2009
ER  -

download .riscopy to clipboard