Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27233300›Full record

ArticlePhysiological reports2016

Comparison of noninvasive pulse transit time estimates as markers of blood pressure using invasive pulse transit time measurements as a reference.

Mingwu Gao, N Bari Olivier, Ramakrishna Mukkamala

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Physiological reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Practical Application of a New Cuffless Blood Pressure Measurement Method.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Wearable Cuff-Less Blood Pressure Estimation at Home via Pulse Transit Time.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Cuff-Less Methods for Blood Pressure Telemonitoring.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mingwu GaoDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
N Bari OlivierDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
Ramakrishna MukkamalaDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan rama@egr.msu.edu.

Funding

Unobtrusive and Affordable Blood Pressure Monitoring Via Pulse Transit TimeU01EB018818 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI MUKKAMALA, RAMAKRISHNA · 2014 to 2018
$3.4M
NIBIB NIH HHS EB018818NIBIB NIH HHS U01 EB018818
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulse transit time (PTT) measured as the time delay between invasive proximal and distal blood pressure (BP) or flow waveforms (invasive PTT [I-PTT]) tightly correlates with BP PTT estimated as the time delay between noninvasive proximal and distal arterial waveforms could therefore permit cuff-less BP monitoring. A popular noninvasive PTT estimate for this application is the time delay between ECG and photoplethysmography (PPG) waveforms (pulse arrival time [PAT]). Another estimate is the time delay between proximal and distal PPG waveforms (PPG-PTT). PAT and PPG-PTT were assessed as markers of BP over a wide physiologic range using I-PTT as a reference. Waveforms for determining I-PTT, PAT, and PPG-PTT through central arteries were measured from swine during baseline conditions and infusions of various hemodynamic drugs. Diastolic, mean, and systolic BP varied widely in each subject (group average (mean ± SE) standard deviation between 25 ± 2 and 36 ± 2 mmHg). I-PTT correlated well with all BP levels (group average R(2) values between 0.86 ± 0.03 and 0.91 ± 0.03). PPG-PTT also correlated well with all BP levels (group average R(2) values between 0.81 ± 0.03 and 0.85 ± 0.02), and its R(2) values were not significantly different from those of I-PTT PAT correlated best with systolic BP (group average R(2) value of 0.70 ± 0.04), but its R(2) values for all BP levels were significantly lower than those of I-PTT (P < 0.005) and PPG-PTT (P < 0.02). The pre-ejection period component of PAT was responsible for its inferior correlation with BP In sum, PPG-PTT was not different from I-PTT and superior to the popular PAT as a marker of BP.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationPulse Wave AnalysisSwineTime FactorsCuff‐less blood pressurePPGpulse arrival timepulse transit timepulse wave velocity

Identifiers

PMID27233300
PMCPMC4886159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.