Back to Search Start Over

Central Pressure Appraisal: Clinical Validation of a Subject-Specific Mathematical Model.

Authors :
Tosello, Francesco
Guala, Andrea
Leone, Dario
Camporeale, Carlo
Bruno, Giulia
Ridolfi, Luca
Veglio, Franco
Milan, Alberto
Source :
PLoS ONE; 3/24/2016, Vol. 11 Issue 3, p1-10, 10p
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Introduction: Current evidence suggests that aortic blood pressure has a superior prognostic value with respect to brachial pressure for cardiovascular events, but direct measurement is not feasible in daily clinical practice. Aim: The aim of the present study is the clinical validation of a multiscale mathematical model for non-invasive appraisal of central blood pressure from subject-specific characteristics. Methods: A total of 51 young male were selected for the present study. Aortic systolic and diastolic pressure were estimated with a mathematical model and were compared to the most-used non-invasive validated technique (SphygmoCor device, AtCor Medical, Australia). SphygmoCor was calibrated through diastolic and systolic brachial pressure obtained with a sphygmomanometer, while model inputs consist of brachial pressure, height, weight, age, left-ventricular end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes, and data from a pulse wave velocity study. Results: Model-estimated systolic and diastolic central blood pressures resulted to be significantly related to SphygmoCor-assessed central systolic (r = 0.65 p <0.0001) and diastolic (r = 0.84 p<0.0001) blood pressures. The model showed a significant overestimation of systolic pressure (+7.8 (-2.2;14) mmHg, p = 0.0003) and a significant underestimation of diastolic values (-3.2(-7.5;1.6), p = 0.004), which imply a significant overestimation of central pulse pressure. Interestingly, model prediction errors mirror the mean errors reported in large meta-analysis characterizing the use of the SphygmoCor when non-invasive calibration is performed. Conclusion: In conclusion, multi-scale mathematical model predictions result to be significantly related to SphygmoCor ones. Model-predicted systolic and diastolic aortic pressure resulted in difference of less than 10 mmHg in the 51% and 84% of the subjects, respectively, when compared with SphygmoCor-obtained pressures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
19326203
Volume :
11
Issue :
3
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
PLoS ONE
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
113969556
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151523