Pulse wave analysis using the Mobil-O-Graph, Arteriograph and Complior device: a comparative study

Area of Science:

• Cardiovascular diagnostics
• Biomedical engineering
• Clinical physiology

Background:

• Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a key indicator of arterial stiffness and holds significant prognostic value.
• Arterial stiffness assessment is crucial for cardiovascular risk stratification.
• Accurate measurement of PWV and central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) is essential for clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the Arteriograph and Complior devices against the Mobil-O-Graph for the assessment of PWV and cSBP.
• To evaluate the agreement and potential discrepancies between these three commonly used devices.

Main Methods:

• A study involving 316 subjects was conducted to measure PWV and cSBP using Arteriograph, Complior, and Mobil-O-Graph.
• Statistical analyses included Bland-Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and coefficient of variation (CV) to compare device readings.
• Data were analyzed to determine mean differences, limits of agreement, and reliability between the devices.

Main Results:

• Bland-Altman analysis revealed acceptable mean differences for PWV (0.5-0.6 m/s) and cSBP (3.8-9.2 mmHg) between the devices.
• High intraclass correlation coefficients (0.86-0.92) indicated good reliability for both PWV and cSBP measurements across devices.
• The Mobil-O-Graph tended to show slightly lower values for PWV and cSBP compared to the other devices.

Conclusions:

• The study demonstrates acceptable agreement among Arteriograph, Complior, and Mobil-O-Graph for pulse wave analysis markers.
• The Mobil-O-Graph may underestimate PWV and cSBP values, warranting consideration in clinical practice.
• Further research is recommended to validate these findings across diverse clinical settings and patient populations.