Abstract
Objectives Modern guidelines for evaluation of leg ischemia in patients with diabetes and foot ulcer recommend toe blood pressure (TBP) measurements rather than the often unreliable ankle blood pressure (ABP). A drawback with TBP is the complicated measurement procedure, unsuitable the outpatient clinic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of a new automatic TBP device (PresTo, Moor Instruments Ltd) developed for use outside vascular laboratories. Design Cross-sectional comparative study. Methods Twenty-three legs in 16 consecutively included diabetic patients with PAD were examined. TBP was measured three times with 2 min in-between. Three examiners read the obtained graphs ( n = 69), which were analyzed for variability over time and between examiners. These results were compared with those obtained from an automated TBP device. Results The mean TBP was 50.9 mm Hg (SD 10.9) when read by examiners compared to 56.4 mm Hg (SD 12.6) when automatically assessed. The 2-min variability was 4.9 mm Hg (SD) for visual readings and 8.1 mm Hg for automatic measurements. The short, long term and examiner dependent variability of visually read TBP ranged from 3.9 to 9.6% of the values. In patients with TBP <45 mm Hg the difference between automatic and visual assessments was small. Conclusion The automatic TBP device is reliable for measuring low pressures and thus for exclusion of critical limb ischemia in patients with diabetes. After algorithm adjustment the device's reliability appears to be acceptable in the entire spectrum of TBP values. TBP appears to have less inter and intraobserver variability than what is reported for ABP.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.