POSSIBILITIES OF THE METHOD OF VOLUMETRIC COMPRESSIVE OSCILLOMETRY FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF BLOOD PRESSURE AND ARTERIAL STIFFNESS IN PATIENTS WITH DECOMPENSATED HEART FAILURE
Irina Chudarova,Elena Troitskaya,Anna Kozlova,Ekaterina Andreeva,Svyatoslav Galochkin,Ekaterina Tereshchenko,Zhanna Kobalava
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0001020872.63057.e0
IF: 4.9
2024-05-01
Journal of Hypertension
Abstract:Objective: Volumetric compressive oscillometry (VCO) is a technique for non-invasive simultaneous assessment of >20 hemodynamic parameters, including arterial stiffness (AS) by pulse wave velocity (PWV). The possibilities of the method in heart failure (HF) had never been studied previously. The aim of the study was to evaluate the concordance of the results of BP and AS measurement by VCO in patients admitted with decompensated HF by comparing them to standard BP measurement and applanation tonometry (AT). Design and method: In patients admitted to the HF center with decompensated HF apart from routine tests, we assessed PWV (carotid-femoral (cf), carotid-radial (cr)) with AT (SphygmoCor) and performed VCO (APKO-8-RIZ-M) (BPvco, PP vco and PWVvco were evaluated). The concordance of the results was assessed by Bland-Altman method. p<0,05 was considered statistically significant. Results: We included 54 patients (61% males, 69.6±10 years, median (med) BMI 28.8 (IQR 25;38.9) kg/m2, 38.9% smokers, HTN in all, DM 37%, CAD 51.9%, med EF 51% (38;55%), med NTproBNP 623 (500;1842) pg/ml; HFrEF 37%, HFmrEF 13%, HFpEF 50%). Median BP was 117(106;130)/70 (68;80) mmHg, pulse pressure (PP) 47 (37;56) mmHg, central BP 109.5 (96;120.5)/71.5 (68;80) mmHg, med cfPWV 8 (6.4;10) m/s, crPWV 9.5 (6.9;12.4) m/s. Median BP by VCO 110 (101;118.5)/56 (47;65) mmHg, PP by VCO was 52.7 (46.3;60) mmHg, median PWV was 6.2 (5.5;7.1). There were no significant differences across EF phenotypes. Bland-Altman method showed no concordance between office brachial BP and BPvco (mean difference 9.3 (95%CI 4.8;13.8) mmHg for SBP and 16.8 (95%CI 13.8;19.8) mmHg for DBP, p<0.001 for trend), brachial PP and PPvco (mean difference -6.5 (95%CI -10.2;-2.9) mmHg, p=0.001) and cfPWV or crPWV by AT and PWV by VCO (mean difference 4.2 (95%CI 2.9;5.5) m/s and 2.7 (95%CI 1.4;4.1) m/s, respectively, p<0.001 for trend). Conclusions: In patients with decompensated HF VCO can‘t be used as an alternative standard BP measurement and assessment of arterial stiffness by applanation tonometry.
peripheral vascular disease