1 / 1

Background

Comparison of estimates of central blood pressure and augmentation index obtained by the SphygmoCor and Omron HEM-9000AI devices T Kamalesh, K McNeill, SC Millasseau, PJ Chowienczyk King’s College London, UK. Background. Methods.

odina
Télécharger la présentation

Background

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of estimates of central blood pressure and augmentation index obtained by the SphygmoCor and Omron HEM-9000AI devices T Kamalesh, K McNeill, SC Millasseau, PJ Chowienczyk King’s College London, UK Background Methods • Central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) differs from brachial systolic blood pressure due to effects of pressure wave transmission and reflection within the systemic circulation and upper limb. • The usual approach to estimating cSBP, as used in the SphygmoCor device (Atcor, Australia), is to apply a transfer function to a radial pressure waveform obtained by hand-held applanation tonometry. • A new device, the Omron HEM-9000AI that employs an automatic wrist-strap mounted tonometer, provides a measure SBP2 obtained directly from the radial waveform that is thought to relate to cSBP. Estimates of cSBP and measurements of AI were made under standardised conditions in triplicate using each device (in random order) on 25 healthy normotensive volunteers, aged 20-71 years and in 25 hypertensive subjects, aged 25 to 76 years on treatment. Results Central BP cSBP Omron andcSBP Sphyg were closely correlated. The mean difference (SD) between cSBP Omron and cSBP Sphyg was 0.33 (7.7) mmHg in hypertensive subjects and 3.6 (5.7) mmHg in normotensive subjects. Augmentation index AI Omron and AI Sphyg were also closely correlated. The mean difference (SD) between AI Omron and AI Sphyg was 3.1 (11.4) % in hypertensive subjects and 0.9 (5.6) % in normotensive subjects. Radial pulse SBP Central pulse cSBP SBP2 DBP Conclusion SBP2 - DBP ×100 % AI = SBP-DBP In normotensive and hypertensive subjects, there is little difference between estimates of cSBP and measurements of AI obtained from the SphygmoCor and Omron devices. Aims • To compare the agreement of estimates of cSBP from the SphygmoCor (cSBP Sphyg) and Omron (cSBP Omron =SBP2) • To compare the agreement and reproducibility of radial augmentation index (AI, a measure of pressure wave reflection, closely correlated with aortic AI) obtained using the using the SphygmoCor and Omron devices. cSBP: Omron vs. SphygmoCor cSBP: Omron vs. SphygmoCor hypertensive normotensive AI: Omron vs. SphygmoCor AI: Omron vs. SphygmoCor Acknowledgement This work was supported by Omron Health Care

More Related