Measurement of pulse wave velocity in normal ageing: comparison of Vicorder and magnetic resonance phase contrast imaging

Jehill D Parikh, Kieren G Hollingsworth, Vijay Kunadian, Andrew Blamire, Guy A MacGowan, Jehill D Parikh, Kieren G Hollingsworth, Vijay Kunadian, Andrew Blamire, Guy A MacGowan

Abstract

Background: Pulse wave velocity is an important measure of cardiovascular risk, and can be measured by several different techniques. We compared age-related changes in pulse wave velocity derived from carotid and femoral artery waveforms using the Vicorder device and descending thoracic aorta time velocity curves using phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a group of normal healthy volunteers, without cardiovascular disease, aged between 20 and 79 years.

Methods: Eighty subjects underwent same-day measurements of Vicorder and MRI pulse wave velocity measurements.

Results: Both Vicorder and MRI-based pulse wave velocity measurements were significantly increased with age (R = 0.59 and 0.57 respectively, both P < 0.0001). Vicorder and MRI pulse wave velocities were also significantly related to each other (R = 0.27, P < 0.05), and Bland Altman plots showed that on average Vicorder measurements were 1.6 m/s greater than MRI. In 5% of cases, agreement between the values of the two techniques were above and below 2 standard deviations, and these were at higher levels of pulse wave velocities. Multiple linear stepwise regression analysis confirmed highly significant relationships of both techniques to age (both P < 0.0001), and MRI was also significantly related to heart rate (P = 0.006) but Vicorder was not.

Conclusions: Both Vicorder and MRI perform similarly in detecting age-related changes in pulse wave velocity. Thus, the choice of using one or the other will depend on other aspects of the investigation, such as the need for portability favouring Vicorder, or need for additional cardiovascular imaging favouring MRI.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov identifier NCT01504828.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Illustration of Vicorder and phase contrast MRI techniques. In panel a, examples of simultaneous Vicorder carotid and femoral arterial waveforms are shown. Panel b shows the two slices of thoracic aorta (AAo – aortic arch, and DAo descending aorta) between which distance is measured (ΔX), and in panel c phase contrast MRI flow images showing ΔT which is the time delay between of the initial upstroke in flow between the two slices
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Relationship of Vicorder to age (a) (y = 0.055x + 5.033, R2 = 0.353, R = 0.594, P < 0.0001) and phase contrast MRI to age (b) (y = 0.067x + 2.859, R2 = 0.327, R = 0.572, P < 0.0001). PWV: pulse wave velocity
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Relationship of Vicorder to phase contrast MRI (a) (y = 0.345x + 3.45, R2 = 0.073, R = 0.271 P < 0.05), and Bland Altman plot of the two techniques (b). On average Vicorder values are 1.6 m/s greater than MRI values. PWV: pulse wave velocity, and SD: standard deviation

References

    1. Laurent S, Cockcroft J, Van Bortel L, Boutouyrie P, Giannattasio C, Hayoz D, et al. Expert consensus document on arterial stiffness: methodological issues and clinical applications. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:2588–2605. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl254.
    1. Lin F, Zhu P, Huang F, Li Q, Yuan Y, Gao Z, et al. Aortic stiffness is associated with the central retinal arteriolar equivalent and retinal vascular fractal dimension in a population along the southeastern coast of China. Hypertens Res. 2015;38:342–348. doi: 10.1038/hr.2015.11.
    1. Seidlerová J, Filipovský J, Mayer O, Wohlfahrt P, Cífková R. Positive effects of antihypertensive treatment on aortic stiffness in the general population. Hypertens Res. 2014;37:64–68. doi: 10.1038/hr.2013.113.
    1. Avolio AP, Chen SG, Wang RP, Zhang CL, Li MF, et al. Effects of aging on changing arterial compliance and left ventricular load in a northern Chinese urban community. Circulation. 1983;68:50–58. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.68.1.50.
    1. Ring M, Eriksson MJ, Zierath JR, Caidahl K. Arterial stiffness estimation in healthy subjects: a validation of oscillometric (Arteriograph) and tonometric (SphygmoCor) techniques. Hypertens Res. 2014;37:999–1007. doi: 10.1038/hr.2014.115.
    1. Groenink M, de Roos A, Mulder BJ, Spaan JA, van der Wall EE. Changes in aortic distensibility and pulse wave velocity assessed with magnetic resonance imaging following beta-blocker therapy in the Marfan syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82:203–208. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00315-4.
    1. Rogers WJ, Hu YL, Coast D, Vido DA, Kramer CM, Pyeritz RE, et al. Age-associated changes in regional aortic pulse wave velocity. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:1123–1129. doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01504-2.
    1. Bossuyt J, Van De Velde S, Azermai M, Vermeersch SJ, De Backer TL, Devos DG, et al. Noninvasive assessment of carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity: the influence of body side and body contours. J Hypertens. 2013;31:946–951. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328360275d.
    1. Markl M, Draney MT, Hope MD, Levin JM, Chan FP, Alley MT, et al. Time-resolved 3-dimensional velocity mapping in the thoracic aorta: visualization of 3-directional blood flow patterns in healthy volunteers and patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2004;28:459–468. doi: 10.1097/00004728-200407000-00005.
    1. Hickson SS, Butlin M, Broad J, Avolio AP, Wilkinson IB, McEniery CM. Validity and repeatability of the Vicorder apparatus: a comparison with the SphygmoCor device. Hypertens Res. 2009;32:1079–1085. doi: 10.1038/hr.2009.154.
    1. McGreevy C, Barry M, Bennett K, Williams D. Repeatability of the measurement of aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV) in the clinical assessment of arterial stiffness in community-dwelling older patients using the Vicorder® device. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2013;73:269–273. doi: 10.3109/00365513.2013.770162.
    1. Pucci G, Cheriyan J, Hubsch A, Hickson SS, Gajendragadkar PR, Watson T, et al. Evaluation of the Vicorder, a novel cuff-based device for the noninvasive estimation of central blood pressure. J Hypertens. 2013;31:77–85. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835a8eb1.
    1. O’Rourke MF. Influence of ventricular ejection on the relationship between central aortic and brachial pressure pulse in man. Cardiovasc Res. 1970;4:291–300. doi: 10.1093/cvr/4.3.291.
    1. Latham RD, Westerhof N, Sipkema P, Rubal BJ, Reuderink P, Murgo JP. Regional wave travel and reflections along the human aorta: a study with six simultaneous micromanometric pressures. Circulation. 1985;72:1257–1269. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.72.6.1257.
    1. McDonald DA. Regional pulse-wave velocity in the arterial tree. J Appl Physiol. 1968;24:73–78.
    1. Müller J, Oberhoffer R, Barta C, Hulpke-Wette M, Hager A. Oscillometric carotid to femoral pulse wave velocity estimated with the Vicorder device. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2013;15:176–179. doi: 10.1111/jch.12045.
    1. Hickson SS, Butlin M, Graves M, Taviani V, Avolio AP, McEniery CM, et al. The relationship of age with regional aortic stiffness and diameter. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:1247–1255. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.09.016.
    1. Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, Redón J, Zanchetti A, Böhm M, et al. 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) J Hypertens. 2013;31:1281–1357. doi: 10.1097/.
    1. Wilkinson IB, Cockcroft JR, McEniery CM. Aortic stiffness as a cardiovascular risk predictor. BMJ. 2015;351:h3764. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h3764.
    1. Coutinho T, Borlaug BA, Pellikka PA, Turner ST, Kullo IJ. Sex differences in arterial stiffness and ventricular-arterial interactions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:96–103. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.997.
    1. Vulliemoz S, Stergiopulos N, Meuli R. Estimation of local aortic elastic properties with MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:649–654. doi: 10.1002/mrm.10100.
    1. Fielden SW, Fornwalt BK, Jerosch-Herold M, Eisner RL, Stillman AE, Oshinski JN. A new method for the determination of aortic pulse wave velocity using cross-correlation on 2D PCMR velocity data. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27:1382–1387. doi: 10.1002/jmri.21387.
    1. Ibrahim e-SH, Johnson KR, Miller AB, Shaffer JM, White RD. Measuring aortic pulse wave velocity using high-field cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparison of techniques. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12:26. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-12-26.
    1. Wilkinson IB, MacCallum H, Flint L, Cockcroft JR, Newby DE, Webb DJ. The influence of heart rate on augmentation index and central arterial pressure in humans. J Physiol. 2000;525:263–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00263.x.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj