论文部分内容阅读
背景大动脉脉搏波传导速度(PWV)已作为评估心血管危险的重要手段之一,但中心动脉压、大小动脉弹性检测方法未被广泛认可,其方法学的重复性、稳定性及临床应用价值尚需进一步评价。目的在健康成人中平行评价3种无创性动脉功能检测结果的重复性。方法健康成人20例,年龄(40±10)岁。同一操作者对其分别测定颈股动脉脉搏波传导速度(cfPWV)、大小动脉弹性指数(C1,C2)及采用脉搏波分析(PWA)测定中心动脉压(C-SBP,C-DBP,C-PP)与中心动脉增强指数(AIx)。健康者隔日于相同条件下重复检测1次。结果1)健康成人cfPWV、中心动脉压、C1、C2两次测量值间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);Pearson相关分析cfPWV(r=0.72)、中心动脉的C-PP(r=0.73)和AIx(r=0.88)两次测值相关性好,C-SBP、C-DBP、C2相关系数分别为0.70、0.59、0.53,P<0.01;但C1两次测值的相关性差(r=0.39,P>0.05);cfPWV、C-SBP、C-DBP、C-PP、AIx和C2前后两次测量值间的ICC分别为0.83、0.82、0.74、0.82、0.91和0.68(P<0.01),C1的ICC为0.55(P=0.046);2)Bland-Altman作图显示各测量值均在差值的(x-±s)范围内,但cfPWV测量值落在一致性限内15%的比例最高,C2最低(P<0.01);3)不同方法之间的相关性:cfPWV与C2(r=-0.548,P<0.05)呈负相关;AIx亦与C2(r=-0.571,P<0.01)呈负相关;4)健康成人cfPWV、AIx与年龄正相关(P<0.05);C2与之负相关(P<0.01);C1与之不相关(P>0.05)。结论在健康人中cfPWV和中心动脉的C-SBP、C-DBP、C-PP和AIx测量结果的重复性较好。
Background Artery aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) has been used as one of the important means to evaluate cardiovascular risk. However, the methods of measuring arterial pressure and arterial elasticity have not been widely accepted. The reproducibility, stability and clinical value of this method Need further evaluation. Objective To evaluate the repeatability of three noninvasive arterial function tests in healthy adults. Methods 20 healthy adults, age (40 ± 10) years old. The same operator measured carotid artery pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), size arterial elasticity index (C1, C2) and pulse wave analysis (PWA) measured central artery pressure (C-SBP, C- PP) and central artery enhancement index (AIx). Healthy people every other day under the same conditions repeated testing 1. Results 1) There was no significant difference between the two measured values of cfPWV, central arterial pressure, C1 and C2 in healthy adults (P> 0.05); Pearson correlation analysis showed that the values of cfPWV (r = 0.72) ) And AIx (r = 0.88). The correlation coefficients of C-SBP, C-DBP and C2 were 0.70,0.59,0.53, P <0.01; = 0.39, P> 0.05). The ICC values of the two measurements before and after cfPWV, C-SBP, C-DBP, C-PP, AIx and C2 were 0.83,0.82,0.74,0.82,0.91 and 0.68 ), ICC of C1 was 0.55 (P = 0.046); 2) The Bland-Altman plot showed that all the measurements were within the range of (x- ± s), but the measured value of cfPWV fell within the consistency limit of 15% (P <0.01); 3) The correlation between different methods: cfPWV was negatively correlated with C2 (r = -0.548, P <0.05) <0.01). 4) There was a positive correlation between cfPWV and AIx in healthy adults (P <0.05) and C2 (P <0.01). C1 was not correlated with age (P> 0.05). Conclusion The repeatability of C-SBP, C-DBP, C-PP and AIx measurements of cfPWV and central artery in healthy subjects is good.