TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of echotracking and magnetic resonance assessment of abdominal aorta distensibility and relationships with pulse wave velocity
AU - Giannattasio, Cristina
AU - Cesana, Francesca
AU - Maestroni, Silvia
AU - Salvioni, Alessandra
AU - Maloberti, Alessandro
AU - Nava, Stefano
AU - Cairo, Matteo
AU - Madotto, Fabiana
AU - Zerboni, Filippo
AU - Sironi, Sandro
AU - Grassi, Guido
AU - Mancia, Giuseppe
PY - 2011/12
Y1 - 2011/12
N2 - Arterial distensibility can be measured either by echotracking or by nuclear magnetic resonance (MRI). Little information, however, is available on the comparison between the two methods and on the relationships between the results obtained with the two approaches and the arterial stiffness gold standard measurement, i.e., pulse wave velocity (PWV). In 28 normotensive subjects (age 33.0 ± 10.4 years, mean ± SD) we measured aortic diameter 1 cm above iliac bifurcation, aortic pulse pressure by tonometry and calculated arterial distensibility via the Reneman formulae for both methods. Aortic diameter and aortic distensibility were not superimposable and higher values were systematically detected with the MRI approach than with the ultrasound one. However, PWV showed a significant correlation with aortic distensibility values obtained by both methods (r = 0.50 and r = 0.49, p <0.05). These data provide evidence that MRI-measured distensibility value is higher than that obtained via echotracking. The significant correlation with PWV, however, suggests that both methods can be regarded as valuable approaches. Considering the greater economic cost and the lower availability in daily clinical and research practice of MRI, echotracking ultrasonography can be regarded as a reliable and feasible method to assess aortic distensibility.
AB - Arterial distensibility can be measured either by echotracking or by nuclear magnetic resonance (MRI). Little information, however, is available on the comparison between the two methods and on the relationships between the results obtained with the two approaches and the arterial stiffness gold standard measurement, i.e., pulse wave velocity (PWV). In 28 normotensive subjects (age 33.0 ± 10.4 years, mean ± SD) we measured aortic diameter 1 cm above iliac bifurcation, aortic pulse pressure by tonometry and calculated arterial distensibility via the Reneman formulae for both methods. Aortic diameter and aortic distensibility were not superimposable and higher values were systematically detected with the MRI approach than with the ultrasound one. However, PWV showed a significant correlation with aortic distensibility values obtained by both methods (r = 0.50 and r = 0.49, p <0.05). These data provide evidence that MRI-measured distensibility value is higher than that obtained via echotracking. The significant correlation with PWV, however, suggests that both methods can be regarded as valuable approaches. Considering the greater economic cost and the lower availability in daily clinical and research practice of MRI, echotracking ultrasonography can be regarded as a reliable and feasible method to assess aortic distensibility.
KW - Aorta
KW - Arterial distensibility
KW - Arterial stiffness
KW - Magnetic resonance
KW - Pulse wave velocity
KW - Ultrasound
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82955248139&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82955248139&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.09.009
DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.09.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 22033135
AN - SCOPUS:82955248139
VL - 37
SP - 1970
EP - 1976
JO - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
JF - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
SN - 0301-5629
IS - 12
ER -