Validation of non-invasive central blood pressure devices: ARTERY Society task force consensus statement on protocol standardization

The original Riva-Rocci method to measure blood pressure (BP) using a cuff at the upper arm assumed the pressure obtained by this technique was a good proxy for central aortic BP.1,2 The clinical (prognostic) importance of brachial cuff BP is undeniable for both the assessment of cardiovascular risk associated with elevated BP and the benefits of treatment-induced BP reduction.3 However, it is also generally appreciated that peripheral artery systolic BP (SBP; brachial or radial artery) may be an inaccurate substitute for central SBP.4 This has been reported in human studies using intra-arterial catheterization of peripheral and central arteries.5–8 There may also be a discrepancy between peripheral and central BP responses to vasoactive drugs.9 These findings are corroborated in larger studies using non-invasive central aortic BP methods,10–13 and, while yet to be fully adopted in clinical practice, an independent prognostic value of central BP has been demonstrated.14–16 Altogether, there is a growing interest among clinicians towards improving risk estimates by using devices that provide more accurate measures of central aortic BP than those provided by current brachial cuff BP methods. Many non-invasive devices have been developed that purport to estimate central BP from different peripheral artery sites (e.g. radial, brachial, carotid arteries) using different principles of recording the pressure or surrogate signals (e.g. applanation tonometry, oscillometry, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging) and different calibration methods to derive central BP. Since upper arm cuff-based devices to estimate central BP are more clinically appealing, in recent years several companies have developed such devices using a variety of techniques (e.g. oscillometric sub-diastolic or supra-systolic waveform analysis with generalized transfer functions), which employ a variety of signal processing steps to estimate central BP from peripheral signals.17,18 Yet, with no standardized guidelines,17 the accuracy testing of these new devices (as well as the preceding devices) has not been undertaken in a uniform fashion with comparable protocols, emphasizing the need for guidance in this field.19–22 An international task force was convened to address this situation

Coronary–aortic interaction during ventricular isovolumic contraction

In earlier work, we suggested that the start of the isovolumic contraction period could be detected in arterial pressure waveforms as the start of a temporary pre-systolic pressure perturbation (AICstart, start of the Arterially detected Isovolumic Contraction), and proposed the retrograde coronary blood volume flow in combination with a backwards traveling pressure wave as its most likely origin. In this study, we tested this hypothesis by means of a coronary artery occlusion protocol. In six Yorkshire × Landrace swine, we simultaneously occluded the left anterior descending (LAD) and left circumflex (LCx) artery for 5 s followed by a 20-s reperfusion period and repeated this sequence at least two more times. A similar procedure was used to occlude only the right coronary artery (RCA) and finally all three main coronary arteries simultaneously. None of the occlusion protocols caused a decrease in the arterial pressure perturbation in the aorta during occlusion (P > 0.20) nor an increase during reactive hyperemia (P > 0.22), despite a higher deceleration of coronary blood volume flow (P = 0.03) or increased coronary conductance (P = 0.04) during hyperemia. These results show that the pre-systolic aortic pressure perturbation does not originate from the coronary arteries

Validation of non-invasive central blood pressure devices: Artery society task force (abridged) consensus statement on protocol standardization

Brachial cuff blood pressure (BP) is clinically important, but may be an inaccurate substitute for central BP. Many non-invasive devices have been developed that purport to estimate central BP from peripheral artery sites, yet with no standardized guidelines; the accuracy testing of these new devices has not been undertaken in a uniform fashion with comparable protocols. This is an abridged paper describing the recommendations reached by an international task force convened to identify issues that need to be addressed and reach consensus relating to methods for assessing and reporting the accuracy (validation) of central BP devices. The recommendations are endorsed by the Association for Research into Arterial Structure and Physiology (ARTERY) Society, as well as the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Arterial Structure and Function, and the ESH Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability. Researchers interested in validating central BP monitors should read the full version of the statement