Use of generalized transfer function-derived central blood pressure for the calculation of baroreflex gain

P. Studinger, Imre Ungi, Z. Lénárd, Beatrix Mersich, L. Rudas, M. Kollai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Peripheral blood pressure measurement underestimates pressure changes during baroreflex testing, resulting in an overestimation of baroreflex gain. This error might be reduced by measuring central blood pressure; the invasive measurement, however, may represent ethical and practical problems. The solution may be the derivation of central blood pressure from the peripheral pulse using a generalized transfer function. METHODS: In the current study, we tested the agreement between catheter-measured and generalized transfer function derived central blood pressure measurements and corresponding baroreflex gains. ECG and blood pressure waveforms were monitored continuously during a phenylephrine-induced pressure rise in 22 subjects undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pressure was measured with a catheter positioned in the aorta and with applanation tonometry in the radial artery. Radial pressure waveforms were subject to a generalized transfer function built in the SphygmoCor device to derive central pressure waveforms. Radial tonometric signal was calibrated with catheter-measured (invasive) and sphygmomanometric (noninvasive) pressures. Baroreflex gains were calculated from the linear regressions between heart period and systolic pressure changes. RESULTS: When radial tonometric signal was calibrated invasively, there was no group difference between baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived and catheter-measured pressures (8.2 ± 1.2 vs. 7.2 ± 1.2 ms/mmHg, P = NS). When radial tonometric signal was calibrated noninvasively, however, baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived pressures overestimated those calculated from catheter-measured pressures. CONCLUSION: Using a generalized transfer function is an accurate method to derive central pressure changes for baroreflex gain calculation. The technique, however, requires invasive pressure measurements for calibration, leaving the problem of a fully noninvasive central pressure measurement unresolved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1156-1162
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Hypertension
Volume26
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2008

Fingerprint

Baroreflex
Blood Pressure
Pressure
Catheters
Radial Artery
Manometry
Phenylephrine
Cardiac Catheterization
Calibration
Pulse
Aorta
Linear Models
Electrocardiography

Keywords

  • Aorta
  • Arterial tonometry
  • Baroreflex control
  • Blood pressure monitoring
  • Fourier analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine
  • Endocrinology

Cite this

Use of generalized transfer function-derived central blood pressure for the calculation of baroreflex gain. / Studinger, P.; Ungi, Imre; Lénárd, Z.; Mersich, Beatrix; Rudas, L.; Kollai, M.

In: Journal of Hypertension, Vol. 26, No. 6, 06.2008, p. 1156-1162.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{becab33313544cc497c14164a5b78d3c,
title = "Use of generalized transfer function-derived central blood pressure for the calculation of baroreflex gain",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Peripheral blood pressure measurement underestimates pressure changes during baroreflex testing, resulting in an overestimation of baroreflex gain. This error might be reduced by measuring central blood pressure; the invasive measurement, however, may represent ethical and practical problems. The solution may be the derivation of central blood pressure from the peripheral pulse using a generalized transfer function. METHODS: In the current study, we tested the agreement between catheter-measured and generalized transfer function derived central blood pressure measurements and corresponding baroreflex gains. ECG and blood pressure waveforms were monitored continuously during a phenylephrine-induced pressure rise in 22 subjects undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pressure was measured with a catheter positioned in the aorta and with applanation tonometry in the radial artery. Radial pressure waveforms were subject to a generalized transfer function built in the SphygmoCor device to derive central pressure waveforms. Radial tonometric signal was calibrated with catheter-measured (invasive) and sphygmomanometric (noninvasive) pressures. Baroreflex gains were calculated from the linear regressions between heart period and systolic pressure changes. RESULTS: When radial tonometric signal was calibrated invasively, there was no group difference between baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived and catheter-measured pressures (8.2 ± 1.2 vs. 7.2 ± 1.2 ms/mmHg, P = NS). When radial tonometric signal was calibrated noninvasively, however, baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived pressures overestimated those calculated from catheter-measured pressures. CONCLUSION: Using a generalized transfer function is an accurate method to derive central pressure changes for baroreflex gain calculation. The technique, however, requires invasive pressure measurements for calibration, leaving the problem of a fully noninvasive central pressure measurement unresolved.",
keywords = "Aorta, Arterial tonometry, Baroreflex control, Blood pressure monitoring, Fourier analysis",
author = "P. Studinger and Imre Ungi and Z. L{\'e}n{\'a}rd and Beatrix Mersich and L. Rudas and M. Kollai",
year = "2008",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282fd125b",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "1156--1162",
journal = "Journal of Hypertension",
issn = "0263-6352",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of generalized transfer function-derived central blood pressure for the calculation of baroreflex gain

AU - Studinger, P.

AU - Ungi, Imre

AU - Lénárd, Z.

AU - Mersich, Beatrix

AU - Rudas, L.

AU - Kollai, M.

PY - 2008/6

Y1 - 2008/6

N2 - BACKGROUND: Peripheral blood pressure measurement underestimates pressure changes during baroreflex testing, resulting in an overestimation of baroreflex gain. This error might be reduced by measuring central blood pressure; the invasive measurement, however, may represent ethical and practical problems. The solution may be the derivation of central blood pressure from the peripheral pulse using a generalized transfer function. METHODS: In the current study, we tested the agreement between catheter-measured and generalized transfer function derived central blood pressure measurements and corresponding baroreflex gains. ECG and blood pressure waveforms were monitored continuously during a phenylephrine-induced pressure rise in 22 subjects undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pressure was measured with a catheter positioned in the aorta and with applanation tonometry in the radial artery. Radial pressure waveforms were subject to a generalized transfer function built in the SphygmoCor device to derive central pressure waveforms. Radial tonometric signal was calibrated with catheter-measured (invasive) and sphygmomanometric (noninvasive) pressures. Baroreflex gains were calculated from the linear regressions between heart period and systolic pressure changes. RESULTS: When radial tonometric signal was calibrated invasively, there was no group difference between baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived and catheter-measured pressures (8.2 ± 1.2 vs. 7.2 ± 1.2 ms/mmHg, P = NS). When radial tonometric signal was calibrated noninvasively, however, baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived pressures overestimated those calculated from catheter-measured pressures. CONCLUSION: Using a generalized transfer function is an accurate method to derive central pressure changes for baroreflex gain calculation. The technique, however, requires invasive pressure measurements for calibration, leaving the problem of a fully noninvasive central pressure measurement unresolved.

AB - BACKGROUND: Peripheral blood pressure measurement underestimates pressure changes during baroreflex testing, resulting in an overestimation of baroreflex gain. This error might be reduced by measuring central blood pressure; the invasive measurement, however, may represent ethical and practical problems. The solution may be the derivation of central blood pressure from the peripheral pulse using a generalized transfer function. METHODS: In the current study, we tested the agreement between catheter-measured and generalized transfer function derived central blood pressure measurements and corresponding baroreflex gains. ECG and blood pressure waveforms were monitored continuously during a phenylephrine-induced pressure rise in 22 subjects undergoing cardiac catheterization. Pressure was measured with a catheter positioned in the aorta and with applanation tonometry in the radial artery. Radial pressure waveforms were subject to a generalized transfer function built in the SphygmoCor device to derive central pressure waveforms. Radial tonometric signal was calibrated with catheter-measured (invasive) and sphygmomanometric (noninvasive) pressures. Baroreflex gains were calculated from the linear regressions between heart period and systolic pressure changes. RESULTS: When radial tonometric signal was calibrated invasively, there was no group difference between baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived and catheter-measured pressures (8.2 ± 1.2 vs. 7.2 ± 1.2 ms/mmHg, P = NS). When radial tonometric signal was calibrated noninvasively, however, baroreflex gains calculated from SphygmoCor-derived pressures overestimated those calculated from catheter-measured pressures. CONCLUSION: Using a generalized transfer function is an accurate method to derive central pressure changes for baroreflex gain calculation. The technique, however, requires invasive pressure measurements for calibration, leaving the problem of a fully noninvasive central pressure measurement unresolved.

KW - Aorta

KW - Arterial tonometry

KW - Baroreflex control

KW - Blood pressure monitoring

KW - Fourier analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=43449104250&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=43449104250&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282fd125b

DO - 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282fd125b

M3 - Article

C2 - 18475153

AN - SCOPUS:43449104250

VL - 26

SP - 1156

EP - 1162

JO - Journal of Hypertension

JF - Journal of Hypertension

SN - 0263-6352

IS - 6

ER -