P126 COMPARISON OF PULSE WAVE ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY IN ELDERLY MEN

Abstract

Background: Both the Sphygmocor (S) and Vicorder (V) devices can be used for pulse wave analysis (PWA). However, large studies comparing data from both devices are lacking. Methods: 1,722 men (78.5±4.7yrs) from the British Regional Heart Study underwent PWA with S and V devices. Brachial blood pressure (BP) was assessed by V and by Omron- HEM907 (S). Measures of central Augmentation Pressure (cAP) Augmentation Index (cAIx) and central (c) BP were compared. Results: Data were successfully obtained in 1,380 (80%) with S and 1,706 (99%) with V. 1,373 men had both S and V data. cAP and cAIx were higher in S than V (17±9 vs 13 ± 5 mmHg and 29±10 vs 21±6% respectively, both p < 0.001), and were significantly correlated (cAP r = 0.65 cAIx r = 0.48 p < 0.001), but with greater differences at higher values. Brachial BP readings were greater with V vs Omron (mean difference 1.1±9.7/3.7±6.3 mmHg). Mean cBP was higher in V than S (139±17 vs 131 ± 19 mmHg) and despite strong correlation between measures (0.87 p < 0.001), cBP was more likely to be greater with S than V cBP at higher cBPs. These differences between V + S remained directionally consistent even after adjustment for risk factors (with multiple regression analysis) and when S PWA results were recalculated using V BP in a subsample (n = 58). Conclusion: PWA evaluations were more frequently successful with using V than S in elderly men. Differences in cAP, cAIx and cBP found between devices were not due to differences in BP calibration values. Further research is needed to understand the causes and clinical implications of these differences