P3.6 Evaluation of Different Methods for Determining the Time Delay of the Arterial Pulse Wave: Application to the Popmetre

• Published in: Artery research Vol. 12; no. 1; p. 12
• Main Authors: Obeid, Hasan, Khettab, Hakim, Hallab, Magid, Boutouyrie, Pierre, Laurent, Stéphane
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.12.2015; Springer Nature B.V; BMC
• Subjects: Algorithms; ARTERY 2015: Poster presentation abstracts; Methods
• ISSN: 1872-9312; 1876-4401
• DOI: 10.1016/j.artres.2015.10.231

Objective Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) can be measured between different sites. Here we used two different aspects to assess the PWV; the standard method Carotid-Femoral (CF) Sphygmocor (AtCorMedical – Australia) and the pOpmetre ® (Axelife SAS – France) which uses the Finger to Toe (FT) signals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between FT-PWV and CF-PWV and to test the robustness of pOpmetre ® build-in algorithm. Design and method CF and FT PWV was measured in 150 subjects. MatLab was used to calculate FT-PWV from pOpmetre ® waveforms using four methods: maximum of second derivative (used by pOpmetre ®), intersecting tangents, 10% threshold and the cross correlation method. Results Using built in algorithms, the comparisons of the PWVs and transit times showed a good agreement between the two methods. FT-PWV correlated with CF-PWV (r 2 = 0.51; p<0.001) and transit time (r 2 = 0.62; p<0.001). The best correlation between FT and CF was observed with the maximum of the second derivative algorithm (PWV: r 2 = 0.56; p<0.001), transit time (r 2 = 0.61; p<0.001). Other algorithms showed weaker correlations: for PWV, intersecting tangents, r 2 = 0.37, 10% upstroke, r 2 = 0.35, cross-correlation, r 2 = 0.22. Conclusions This study showed that pOpmetre ® is well correlated with reference methods and the wave foot detection algorithm used by popmetre ® gave the best correlation comparing to other algorithms. The FT-PWV technique has correct agreement with the reference technique, however further studies are needed to validate FT-PWV method in larger populations. Compared to CF-PWV, FT-PWV is faster, simpler to perform and more acceptable to patients.