Repository logo

Infoscience

  • English
  • French
Log In
Logo EPFL, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne

Infoscience

  • English
  • French
Log In
  1. Home
  2. Academic and Research Output
  3. Journal articles
  4. Individualization of transfer function in estimation of central aortic pressure from the peripheral pulse is not required in patients at rest
 
research article

Individualization of transfer function in estimation of central aortic pressure from the peripheral pulse is not required in patients at rest

Westerhof, Berend E
•
Guelen, Ilja
•
Stok, Wim J
Show more
2008
Journal of applied physiology

Central aortic pressure gives better insight into ventriculo-arterial coupling and better prognosis of cardiovascular complications than peripheral pressures. Therefore transfer functions (TF), reconstructing aortic pressure from peripheral pressures, are of great interest. Generalized TFs (GTF) give useful results, especially in larger study populations, but detailed information on aortic pressure might be improved by individualization of the TF. We found earlier that the time delay, representing the travel time of the pressure wave between measurement site and aorta is the main determinant of the TF. Therefore, we hypothesized that the TF might be individualized (ITF) using this time delay. In a group of 50 patients at rest, aged 28-66 yr (43 men), undergoing diagnostic angiography, ascending aortic pressure was 119 +/- 20/70 +/- 9 mmHg (systolic/diastolic). Brachial pressure, almost simultaneously measured using catheter pullback, was 131 +/- 18/67 +/- 9 mmHg. We obtained brachial-to-aorta ITFs using time delays optimized for the individual and a GTF using averaged delay. With the use of ITFs, reconstructed aortic pressure was 121 +/- 19/69 +/- 9 mmHg and the root mean square error (RMSE), as measure of difference in wave shape, was 4.1 +/- 2.0 mmHg. With the use of the GTF, reconstructed pressure was 122 +/- 19/69 +/- 9 mmHg and RMSE 4.4 +/- 2.0 mmHg. The augmentation index (AI) of the measured aortic pressure was 26 +/- 13%, and with ITF and GTF the AIs were 28 +/- 12% and 30 +/- 11%, respectively. Details of the wave shape were reproduced slightly better with ITF but not significantly, thus individualization of pressure transfer is not effective in resting patients.

  • Details
  • Metrics
Type
research article
DOI
10.1152/japplphysiol.91052.2008
Web of Science ID

WOS:000261293800022

PubMed ID

18845775

Author(s)
Westerhof, Berend E
Guelen, Ilja
Stok, Wim J
Lasance, Han A J
Ascoop, Carl A P L
Wesseling, Karel H
Westerhof, Nico
Bos, Willem Jan W
Stergiopulos, Nikos  
Spaan, Jos A E
Date Issued

2008

Published in
Journal of applied physiology
Volume

105

Issue

6

Start page

1858

End page

63

Subjects

Algorithms

•

Pulse

Editorial or Peer reviewed

REVIEWED

Written at

EPFL

EPFL units
LHTC  
Available on Infoscience
December 16, 2010
Use this identifier to reference this record
https://infoscience.epfl.ch/handle/20.500.14299/62231
Logo EPFL, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne
  • Contact
  • infoscience@epfl.ch

  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Instagram
  • Follow us on LinkedIn
  • Follow us on X
  • Follow us on Youtube
AccessibilityLegal noticePrivacy policyCookie settingsEnd User AgreementGet helpFeedback

Infoscience is a service managed and provided by the Library and IT Services of EPFL. © EPFL, tous droits réservés