RESUMO
The use of oscillometric methods to determine brachial blood pressure (bBP) can lead to a systematic underestimation of the invasively measured systolic (bSBP) and pulse (bPP) pressure levels, together with a significant overestimation of diastolic pressure (bDBP). Similarly, the agreement between brachial mean blood pressure (bMBP), invasively and non-invasively measured, can be affected by inaccurate estimations/assumptions. Despite several methodologies that can be applied to estimate bMBP non-invasively, there is no consensus on which approach leads to the most accurate estimation. Aims: to evaluate the association and agreement between: (1) non-invasive (oscillometry) and invasive bBP; (2) invasive bMBP, and bMBP (i) measured by oscillometry and (ii) calculated using six different equations; and (3) bSBP and bPP invasively and non-invasively obtained by applanation tonometry and employing different calibration methods. To this end, invasive aortic blood pressure and bBP (catheterization), and non-invasive bBP (oscillometry [Mobil-O-Graph] and brachial artery applanation tonometry [SphygmoCor]) were simultaneously obtained (34 subjects, 193 records). bMBP was calculated using different approaches. Results: (i) the agreement between invasive bBP and their respective non-invasive measurements (oscillometry) showed dependence on bBP levels (proportional error); (ii) among the different approaches used to obtain bMBP, the equation that includes a form factor equal to 33% (bMBP = bDBP + bPP/3) showed the best association with the invasive bMBP; (iii) the best approach to estimate invasive bSBP and bPP from tonometry recordings is based on the calibration scheme that employs oscillometric bMBP. On the contrary, the worst association between invasive and applanation tonometry-derived bBP levels was observed when the brachial pulse waveform was calibrated to bMBP quantified as bMBP = bDBP + bPP/3. Our study strongly emphasizes the need for methodological transparency and consensus for non-invasive bMBP assessment.
RESUMO
Background: Left ventricular dyssynchrony (LVD) and postextrasystolic potentiation (PESP) associated with premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) may play a role in the development of premature ventricular contraction-induced cardiomyopathy (PVC-CM). Long-coupled (LC) PVCs have a greater LVD than short-coupled (SC) PVCs, whereas SC-PVCs have a stronger PESP than LC-PVCs. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare SC-PVCs and LC-PVCs to evaluate the roles of LVD, PESP, and atrioventricular dissociation (AVD) in the development of PVC-CM. Methods: Thirty-six canines underwent pacemaker implantation to induce bigeminal right ventricular apical epicardial PVCs (50% burden) for 12 weeks. Telemetry assessed PVC burden and AVD. Animals were grouped as SC-PVC (coupling interval [CI] 200-220ms), LC-PVC (CI 330 ms), or sham (control). Echocardiographic changes, AVD, and hemodynamics were monitored for 12 weeks. Results: PVC burden was similar between SC-PVC and LC-PVC groups but was statistically higher in the SC-PVC group (50% vs 47.5%; P = .028). After 12 weeks, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) significantly decreased in both SC-PVC and LC-PVC groups (47.1% ± 1.4% and 45.5% ± 2%, respectively) compared to sham group (61% ± 1.6%; P <.001). Overall AVD was similar between SC-PVC and LC-PVC groups, and there was no significant correlation between AVD and reduction in LVEF at 12 weeks (r = 0.09, P = .5; and r = 0.06, P = .8, respectively). Additionally, both SC-PVC and LC-PVC groups experienced substantial declines in max and min dP/dt after 12 weeks compared to baseline. Conclusion: Neither PVC CI nor AVD played an independent role in the development or severity of PVC-CM. LVD and PESP make equal relative contributions to the development of PVC-CM.