Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Nov;40(5):1064-70.
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24471. Epub 2013 Nov 8.

Development and validation of a novel method to derive central aortic systolic pressure from the MR aortic distension curve

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Development and validation of a novel method to derive central aortic systolic pressure from the MR aortic distension curve

Michael A Quail et al. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: Central aortic systolic pressure (CASP) is a more accurate measure of load and cardiovascular risk than brachial pressure. Unfortunately, CASP is difficult to measure using current methods. In this study we report three methods of determining CASP by combining MR-derived aortic area curves with different models of the pressure-area relationship.

Materials and methods: CASP was derived by calibrating aortic area curves to the brachial mean and diastolic pressure, using: linear, exponential, and arctangent models in 20 volunteers using a high temporal resolution spiral PC-MR flow sequence. The arctangent model also required calibration with pulse wave velocity. Carotid tonometry CASP was used as the reference standard.

Results: Brachial systolic pressure correlated only moderately with carotid CASP r(2) = 0.46 (P = 0.01). However, arctangent, exponential, and linear CASP correlated strongly with carotid CASP, r(2) = 0.90, r(2) = 0.86, r(2) = 0.85, respectively (P < 0.0001). There was excellent agreement between carotid CASP and both arctangent (bias 1.5; SD 3.3) and exponential CASP (bias 0.6; SD 3.6). There was a slight underestimation using the linear model (bias -2.3; SD 3.8) and poor agreement and overestimation using brachial systolic pressure (bias 12.9; SD 8.0).

Conclusion: We have shown that CASP can be derived from MR data: arctangent and exponential methods being superior to the linear method. The superior correlation of MR derived CASP over brachial systolic BP suggests these measures will allow more comprehensive assessment of systemic arterial hypertension.

Keywords: MRI; central aortic blood pressure; hypertension; pressure-area relationship; pulse wave velocity; tonometry.

PubMed Disclaimer