Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 18, 2026
Ultrasound-based Pulse Wave Velocity Evaluation in Mice
Published on: February 14, 2017
Tonometer- and ultrasound-based pulse wave analysis - a comparative study
Stefan Orter1, Elisabetta Bianchini2, Siegfried Wassertheurer3
1AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Health & Bioresources, Medical Signal Analysis, Vienna, Austria; Institute of Biomedical Electronics, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
Background And Objective:
Arterial pulse wave analysis (PWA), a tool capable of reflecting regional hemodynamics and wave propagation characteristics, has been primarily based on tonometric measurements, while ultrasound has been used for evaluating local arterial wall mechanics. This study investigates the accuracy of aortic PWA, derived from ultrasound measurements of carotid diameter, in comparison to standard tonometry.
Methods:
A sub-dataset of the FUCHSIA study (i.e., patients with fibromuscular dysplasia, matched hypertensives and matched healthy controls) with pairs of carotid ultrasound (MyLab, ESAOTE, Genoa, Italy) and tonometric (SphygmoCor CvMS, Atcor Medical) recordings were used for analyses. Ultrasound longitudinal scans were processed as follows: extraction of diameter curves (Carotid Studio, Quipu); discarding low-quality curves; transformation of diameter to local pressure curves by mathematical models; machine-learning-based transformation from carotid to aortic pulse waves; and finally, calibration of aortic pressure curves. ARCSolver algorithms (AIT) were applied to these ultrasound-based aortic pressure waveforms and the tonometry-based aortic waveforms as reference method to derive PWA parameters (e.g., heart rate (HR), central systolic pressure (cSBP) and augmentation index (AIx)) for pairwise comparison.
Results:
In total, 74 recordings from 49 patients (51 (SD 15) years; 15 men) were used in this comparative study. Tonometry- and ultrasound-derived HR correlated well (r = 0.88) with no significant bias (mean difference 0.58 (SD 4.9) bpm). Comparable results were obtained for cSBP (r = 0.97, mean difference -3.6 (SD 4.2) mmHg) and AIx (r = 0.77, mean difference -4.2 (SD 9.1) %).
Conclusions:
Central PWA parameters obtained from carotid ultrasound-derived aortic pressure curves showed agreement with tonometry-based measurements and results are in line with literature.
Related Concept Videos
01:19Assessing Blood pressure using a doppler ultrasound
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Doppler Ultrasound Blood Pressure Assessment:
Preparation of Equipment:
01:13Special considerations while measuring pulse
01:30Equipments Used To Measure Blood Pressure
This invasive approach involves cannulating a peripheral artery. During each cardiac contraction, pressure generates mechanical motion within the catheter, transmitted through rigid, fluid-filled tubing to a transducer. This transducer converts mechanical motion into electrical signals displayed as waveforms on a monitor. An automatic flushing system prevents blood backflow. Due to the potential risk of unexpected arterial blood loss, this method is primarily used in intensive...
01:16Pulse
The pulse serves as a clinical indicator...
01:11Assessment of radial pulse
The radial pulse, located at the wrist, is often the preferred site for assessing peripheral pulse because of its accessibility and dependability. The process of determining the radial pulse involves several steps:
01:25Assessment of apical radial pulse
The A-R pulse assessment involves simultaneous evaluation of the apical and radial pulses. When the apical and radial pulse rates vary, this assessment helps identify a pulse deficit.
Pre-Procedural Preparation