Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
WINCARS Activities
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
WINCARS Activities
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
02 (
01
); 020-025
doi:
10.1055/s-0038-1656454

Comparison of Derived Central Aortic Pressure vs Cuff Peripheral Pressure

Senior Resident, Department of Cardiology, NIMS, India
PhD student, Department of Cardiology, NIMS, India
Address for correspondence venkatasivakrishna.k@gmail.com
Licence
This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher; therefore Scientific Scholar has no control over the quality or content of this article.

Abstract

Abstract

Background: Emerging evidence favours Central aortic pressure as a better correlate of cardiovascular events than peripheral BP recorded with sphygmomanometer. Noninvasive devices to calculate the derived central aortic pressures are available now. We want to see the difference of BP between derived central BP vs manual recorded BP and to see whether these BP values are consistent among different sexes and age groups.

Materials and methods: In the present study 63 consecutive patients both male and female who attended the cardiology outpatient department were studied. In all these patients blood pressure was recorded both manually by sphygmomanometer and by Mobil-O-Graph® Pulse Wave Analyser (ARC Solver). The Mobil-O-Graph ® system works on the oscillometric recording of pulse waves at the brachial artery site. We recorded the BP in sitting posture. We compared the derived central, manual and device measured BP, cardiac output, and pulse wave velocity between both genders.

Results: Among the study population (63 patients) 20 were females and 43 were males with mean age of 58.92±10.9 yrs. The mean systolic and diastolic manually recorded peripheral BP was 127.25 ± 19.89 and 79.25 ± 8.58 mm of Hg respectively, whereas the mean peripheral SBP and DBP recorded by the device was 129.40 ± 21.21 and 81.56 ± 12.83 mm of Hg respectively (comparable p=0.6, 0.2). The mean central aortic SBP & DBP recorded by the device was 117.37 ± 19.17 and 81.67 ± 13.04 mm of Hg with the mean pulse wave velocity of 8.392 ± 1.741 m/sec. There was a statistically significant difference in the central aortic SBP and manual SBP (p=0.005), whereas the difference in DBP was not statistically significant (p=0.2). There is no statistically significant difference in the central and peripheral SBP and DBP recorded by the device among males and females. The device derived parameters including cardiac output, pulse wave velocity also did not show significant difference in both sexes.

Conclusion: Derived central aortic systolic pressure recorded by the device is lower than the manually recorded pressure whereas there was no difference in diastolic BP. There is no difference in these BP recordings between the genders.

Keywords

Central blood pressure (BP)
Peripheral BP
Cuff BP

Fulltext Views
6

PDF downloads
0
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections