Abstract
In this paper, tapered vs. uniform tube-load models are comparatively investigated as mathematical representation for blood pressure (BP) wave propagation in human aorta. The relationship between the aortic inlet and outlet BP waves was formulated based on the exponentially tapered and uniform tube-load models. Then, the validity of the two tube-load models was comparatively investigated by fitting them to the experimental aortic and femoral BP waveform signals collected from 13 coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients. The two tube-load models showed comparable goodness of fit: (i) the root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was 3.3+/−1.1 mmHg in the tapered tube-load model and 3.4+/−1.1 mmHg in the uniform tube-load model; and (ii) the correlation was r = 0.98+/−0.02 in the tapered tube-load model and r = 0.98+/−0.01 mmHg in the uniform tube-load model. They also exhibited frequency responses comparable to the non-parametric frequency response derived from the aortic and femoral BP waveforms in most patients. Hence, the uniform tube-load model was superior to its tapered counterpart in terms of the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). In general, the tapered tube-load model yielded the degree of tapering smaller than what is physiologically relevant: the aortic inlet-outlet radius ratio was estimated as 1.5 on the average, which was smaller than the anatomically plausible typical radius ratio of 3.5 between the ascending aorta and femoral artery. When the tapering ratio was restricted to the vicinity of the anatomically plausible typical value, the exponentially tapered tube-load model tended to underperform the uniform tube-load model (RMSE: 3.9+/−1.1 mmHg; r = 0.97+/−0.02). It was concluded that the uniform tube-load model may be more robust and thus preferred as the representation for BP wave propagation in human aorta; compared to the uniform tube-load model, the exponentially tapered tube-load model may not provide valid physiological insight on the aortic tapering, and its efficacy on the goodness of fit may be only marginal.
Highlights
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity that imposes profound impact on health and economy in the United States as well as globally (Benjamin et al, 2018)
According to the recent statistics reported by the American Heart Association, CVD is currently responsible for more deaths each year than cancer and chronic lower respiratory disease combined in the United States
Recent work has suggested that central aortic blood pressure (BP) measured in the vicinity of the heart may serve as superior signature of CV health and disease to the conventional brachial BP (Safar et al, 2002; Roman et al, 2007, 2010; Ferguson et al, 2008; Jankowski et al, 2008; Pini et al, 2008; Vlachopoulos et al, 2010; McEniery et al, 2014; Ochoa et al, 2018)
Summary
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity that imposes profound impact on health and economy in the United States as well as globally (Benjamin et al, 2018). According to the recent statistics reported by the American Heart Association, CVD is currently responsible for more deaths each year than cancer and chronic lower respiratory disease (which are the second and third cause of death, respectively) combined in the United States. Regardless, the widespread use of central aortic BP for CV health and disease assessment has been largely hampered by the challenges associated with its direct measurement, including the requirement for inconvenient and risky clinical procedures as well as trained operators [e.g., cardiac catheterization (Sharman et al, 2006; Ding et al, 2011; Fazeli et al, 2014; McEniery et al, 2014) and carotid artery tonometry (Chen et al, 1996; Gallagher et al, 2004)]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
