Methodological considerations for the measurement of arterial stiffness using applanation tonometry.

INTRODUCTION

Accurate comparisons of carotid--femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) within and across studies require standardized procedures. Guidelines suggest reporting the average of at least two cfPWV measurements; if the difference exceeds 0.5 m/s, a third measurement should be taken, and the median reported. Another method involves repeating measurements until two values are within 0.5 m/s. However, in many studies, duplicate measurements are averaged irrespective of the difference between readings. We evaluated the impact of these methods on the reported cfPWV value.

METHODS

Measurements of cfPWV (SphygmoCor) from five studies included individuals spanning a wide age range, with or without comorbid conditions, and pregnant women. In participants with at least three high-quality measurements, differences between the median value (MED) and the average of the first two cfPWV measurements (AVG1) and the average of two cfPWV measurements within 0.5 m/s (AVG2) were evaluated using paired t-tests and Bland--Altman plots.

RESULTS

Participants' mean age was 50 ± 14 years and BMI was 28.0 ± 5.5 kg/m2 (N = 306, 79% women). The overall mean difference was -0.10 m/s (95% CI 0.17 to -0.04) between MED and AVG1, and 0.11 m/s (95% CI 0.05--0.17) between MED and AVG2. The absolute difference exceeded 0.5 m/s in 34% (MED-AVG1) and 22% (MED-AVG2) of participants, and 1 m/s in 8% of participants (both MED-AVG1 and MED-AVG2). Scatter around the bias line increased with higher mean cfPWV values.

CONCLUSION

Although the overall mean difference in cfPWV between protocols was not clinically relevant, large variation led to absolute differences exceeding 0.5 m/s in a large proportion of participants.

Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.