Medicina clinica · 2024
Oscillometric devices vs. arterial Doppler in measuring the ankle-arm index for the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martín-Rubio Irene, Marín-García Beatriz, Romero-Velasco Elisa, Thuissard-Vasallo Israel John, Bautista-Hernández Azucena, Abad-Pérez Daniel
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Peripheral arterial disease is a marker of vascular damage that is diagnosed by measuring the ankle-brachial index. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and agreement of the MESI ABPI-MD and Microlife WatchBP® office-ABI oscillometric devices with respect to the gold standard arterial Doppler.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational, cross-sectional, descriptive study of inpatients who underwent ABI measurement with the three devices. Values are considered normal between 1-1.4, indeterminate between 0.91-0.99 and pathological ≤0.9 and >1.4.
RESULTS: A total of 187 patients (54.4% male) with a mean age of 66 years were included. The Doppler results were inferior to those of the oscillometric devices (median [IQR] 1.1 [0.2] vs. 1.2 [0.2], P<.05), with no significant differences between the automated devices (P=.29 for the right lower limb and P=.342 for the left lower limb). Both devices had high specificity (96.5-99.2%) and low sensitivity (29.5-45.4%). The correlation of the results was good-moderate for MESI and moderate for Microlife. The agreement between the two was acceptable-moderate.
CONCLUSION: Automated oscillometric devices could be useful in asymptomatic patients as an alternative to arterial Doppler.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational, cross-sectional, descriptive study of inpatients who underwent ABI measurement with the three devices. Values are considered normal between 1-1.4, indeterminate between 0.91-0.99 and pathological ≤0.9 and >1.4.
RESULTS: A total of 187 patients (54.4% male) with a mean age of 66 years were included. The Doppler results were inferior to those of the oscillometric devices (median [IQR] 1.1 [0.2] vs. 1.2 [0.2], P<.05), with no significant differences between the automated devices (P=.29 for the right lower limb and P=.342 for the left lower limb). Both devices had high specificity (96.5-99.2%) and low sensitivity (29.5-45.4%). The correlation of the results was good-moderate for MESI and moderate for Microlife. The agreement between the two was acceptable-moderate.
CONCLUSION: Automated oscillometric devices could be useful in asymptomatic patients as an alternative to arterial Doppler.