Impact of varying diastolic pressure fitting technique for the reservoir-wave model on wave intensity analysis. (November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pomella, Nicola; Rietzschel, Ernst R; Segers, Patrick; Khir, Ashraf William
• Other Names: Khir Ashraf W guest-editor.; Segers Patrick guest-editor.
• Is Part Of: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Volume 234:Number 11(2020)
• Page Start: 1300
• Page End: 1311
• Publication Date: 2020-11
• Subjects: Blood flow measurement -- cardiovascular system mechanics -- hemodynamics -- mathematical modeling [medical] -- medical signal processing -- reservoir pressure -- asymptotic pressure -- wave intensity analysis; Biomedical engineering -- Periodicals; Medical instruments and apparatus -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1177/0954411920959957
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0954-4119

Abstract

The reservoir-wave model assumes that the measured arterial pressure is made of two components: reservoir and excess. The effect of the reservoir volume should be excluded to quantify the effects of forward and backward traveling waves on blood pressure. Whilst the validity of the reservoir-wave concept is still debated, there is no consensus on the best fitting method for the calculation of the reservoir pressure waveform. Therefore, the aim of this parametric study is to examine the effects of varying the fitting technique on the calculation of reservoir and excess components of pressure and velocity waveforms. Common carotid pressure and flow velocity were measured using applanation tonometry and doppler ultrasound, respectively, in 1037 healthy humans collected randomly from the Asklepios population, aged 35 to 55 years old. Different fitting techniques to the diastolic decay of the measured arterial pressure were used to determine the asymptotic pressure decay, which in turn was used to determine the reservoir pressure waveform. The corresponding wave speed was determined using the PU-loop method, and wave intensity parameters were calculated and compared. Different fitting methods resulted in significant changes in the shape of the reservoir pressure waveform; however, its peak and time integral remained constant in this study. Although peak and integral of excess pressure, velocity components and wave intensity changed significantly with changing the diastolic decay fitting method, wave speed was not substantially modified. We conclude that wave speed, peak reservoir pressure and its time integral are independent of the diastolic pressure decay fitting techniques examined in this study. Therefore, these parameters are considered more reliable diagnostic indicators than excess pressure and velocity which are more sensitive to fitting techniques.