TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimation of aortic pulse wave velocity based on waveform decomposition of central aortic pressure waveform
AU - Liu, Wenyan
AU - Yao, Yang
AU - Yang, Jinzhong
AU - Song, Daiyuan
AU - Zhang, Yuelan
AU - Sun, Guozhe
AU - Xu, Lisheng
AU - Avolio, Alberto
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Objective. Aortic stiffness is associated with risk of cardiovascular events. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) is the current noninvasive gold standard for assessing aortic stiffness. However, the cfPWV measurement is challenging, requiring simultaneous signals at the carotid and femoral sites. Approach. In this study, the aorticPWVis estimated using a single radial pressure waveform and compared with cfPWV. 111 subjects' aortic PWVs are estimated from the decomposition of the derived central aortic pressure waveform based on three types of reconstructed flow waveform: The peak of triangular flow waveform based on 30% ejection time (Q30%tri), the peak of triangular flow waveform based on inflection point (Qtri), and averaged flow waveform (Qavg). The central aortic pressure waveform is derived from a radial pressure waveform via a validated transfer function. Main results. TheQavg is used for estimating aorticPWVwithout the determination of the peak point of the triangular flow waveforms. The estimated aorticPWVshows good agreement with cfPWV. The mean difference ± SD is 0.29 ± 1.50ms-1 (r2 = 0.29, p<0.001) for theQ30%tri; 0.27 ± 1.40ms-1 (r2 = 0.38, p < 0.001) for theQtri; 0.23 ± 1.39ms-1 (r2 = 0.40, p < 0.001) for theQavg. The correlation between estimated aorticPWVbased onQ30%tri and measured cfPWV is weak. The results ofQtri andQavg show no obvious difference. Significance. The proposed method can be used as a less complex way than conventional measurement of cfPWV to further assess arterial stiffness and predict cardiovascular risks or events.
AB - Objective. Aortic stiffness is associated with risk of cardiovascular events. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) is the current noninvasive gold standard for assessing aortic stiffness. However, the cfPWV measurement is challenging, requiring simultaneous signals at the carotid and femoral sites. Approach. In this study, the aorticPWVis estimated using a single radial pressure waveform and compared with cfPWV. 111 subjects' aortic PWVs are estimated from the decomposition of the derived central aortic pressure waveform based on three types of reconstructed flow waveform: The peak of triangular flow waveform based on 30% ejection time (Q30%tri), the peak of triangular flow waveform based on inflection point (Qtri), and averaged flow waveform (Qavg). The central aortic pressure waveform is derived from a radial pressure waveform via a validated transfer function. Main results. TheQavg is used for estimating aorticPWVwithout the determination of the peak point of the triangular flow waveforms. The estimated aorticPWVshows good agreement with cfPWV. The mean difference ± SD is 0.29 ± 1.50ms-1 (r2 = 0.29, p<0.001) for theQ30%tri; 0.27 ± 1.40ms-1 (r2 = 0.38, p < 0.001) for theQtri; 0.23 ± 1.39ms-1 (r2 = 0.40, p < 0.001) for theQavg. The correlation between estimated aorticPWVbased onQ30%tri and measured cfPWV is weak. The results ofQtri andQavg show no obvious difference. Significance. The proposed method can be used as a less complex way than conventional measurement of cfPWV to further assess arterial stiffness and predict cardiovascular risks or events.
KW - Aortic pulse wave velocity
KW - Flow waveform reconstruction
KW - Measured carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity
KW - Noninvasive method
KW - Radial pressure waveform
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119041285&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1088/1361-6579/ac23a7
DO - 10.1088/1361-6579/ac23a7
M3 - Article
C2 - 34479234
AN - SCOPUS:85119041285
SN - 0967-3334
VL - 42
SP - 1
EP - 16
JO - Physiological Measurement
JF - Physiological Measurement
IS - 10
M1 - 105001
ER -