國家衛生研究院 NHRI:Item 3990099045/6710
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 12145/12927 (94%)
造访人次 : 856273      在线人数 : 436
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻
    主页 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上传 ‧ 说明 ‧ 关于NHRI ‧ 管理 到手机版


    jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://ir.nhri.org.tw/handle/3990099045/6710


    题名: Measurement of central aortic pulse pressure: Noninvasive brachial cuff-based estimation by a transfer function vs. a novel pulse wave analysis method
    作者: Cheng, HM;Sung, SH;Shih, YT;Chuang, SY;Yu, WC;Chen, CH
    贡献者: Division of Health Services and Preventive Medicine
    摘要: Background: The prognostic value of central aortic pulse pressure (PP-C) may have been underestimated due to its measurement inaccuracy. We aimed to investigate the accuracy of noninvasive brachial cuff-based estimation of PP-C by a generalized transfer function (GTF) or a novel pulse wave analysis (PWA) approach to directly estimate PP-C. Methods: Invasive high-fidelity right brachial and central aortic pressure tracings, and left brachial pulse volume plethysmography (PVP) waveforms from an oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitor were all digitized simultaneously in 40 patients during cardiac catheterization. An aortic-to-brachial GTF and a PWA multivariate prediction model using the PVP waveforms calibrated to brachial cuff systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP(DBP) were constructed. Accuracy of the two methods was examined in another 100 patients against invasively measured PP-C. Results: The error of cuff PP in estimating PP-C was 1.8 ± 12.4 mm Hg. Application of the GTF on noninvasively calibrated PVP waveforms produced reconstructed aortic pressure waves and PP-C estimates with errors of −3.4 ± 11.6 mm Hg (PP-C = reconstructed aortic SBP − aortic DBP) and −2.3 ± 11.4 mm Hg (PP-C = reconstructed aortic SBP − cuff DBP), respectively. The observed systematic errors were proportional to the magnitudes of PP-C. In contrast, the error of the PWA prediction model was 3.0 ± 7.1 mm Hg without obvious proportional systematic error. Conclusions: Large random and systematic errors are introduced into the PP-C estimates when PP-C is calculated as the difference between the estimated central SBP and central or cuff DBP. The accuracy can be improved substantially with the novel PWA approach.
    日期: 2012-11
    關聯: American Journal of Hypertension. 2012 Nov;25(11):1162-1169.
    Link to: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ajh.2012.116
    JIF/Ranking 2023: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=NHRI&SrcApp=NHRI_IR&KeyISSN=0895-7061&DestApp=IC2JCR
    Cited Times(WOS): https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000310110800004
    Cited Times(Scopus): http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84864535299
    显示于类别:[莊紹源] 期刊論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    SCP84864535299.pdf244KbAdobe PDF395检视/开启


    在NHRI中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

    TAIR相关文章

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈