4.4 Article

The optimal measure of microvascular function with velocity time integral for cardiovascular risk prediction

期刊

VASCULAR MEDICINE
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 287-293

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1358863X12451337

关键词

Doppler; duplex; endothelium; risk assessment; risk factors; ultrasonography; vascular

资金

  1. Pfizer Canada
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  3. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Alberta
  4. AI-HS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent evidence suggests that microvascular function may be important in cardiovascular risk prediction. One measure of microvascular function is hyperaemic velocity time integral (VTI). We assessed whether the VTI of more than one beat of reactive hyperaemia would provide a stronger correlate to traditional cardiovascular risk factors using a subset of subjects from the Firefighters and Their Endothelium (FATE) study. Vascular function was assessed by measurement of hyperaemic blood velocity with high-resolution ultrasound of the brachial artery. We evaluated three measures in the current analysis: the VTI of the first beat, average VTI of 10 beats, and maximum VTI of 10 beats post-cuff release. A total of 399 male subjects (45.5 +/- 10 years) were included in this analysis. Univariate correlations between the three end points and cardiovascular risk factors were calculated, and multivariable regression models constructed. Intra-observer variability was approximately equal for all VTI end points (coefficient of variation: first = 1.6%, average = 1.4%, maximum = 1.4%). Univariate correlations between VTI and cardiovascular risk factors were similar across all three end points. In multivariable analyses, there were no differences in the relationships between cardiovascular risk factors and the various VTI end points (R-2 from 0.090 to 0.102). Age, systolic blood pressure, and BMI were predictors of the three VTI end points (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the first beat of reactive hyperaemia remains the suitable measure of microvascular function.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据