Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

A comparison of methods for assessing total arterial compliance

Journal of Human Hypertension volume 24, pages 254–262 (2010)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

There are several methods of assessing total arterial compliance (TAC) based on the two element Windkessel model, which is a ratio of pressure and volume, but the optimal technique is unclear. In this study, three methods of estimating TAC were compared to determine which was the most robust in a large group of patients with and without cardiovascular risk. In all, 320 patients (170 men; age 55±10) were studied; TAC was determined by the pulse-pressure method (PPM), the area method (AM) and the stroke volume/pulse-pressure method (SVPP). We obtained arterial waveforms using radial applanation tonometry, dimensions using two-dimensional echocardiography and flow data by Doppler. Clinical data, risk factors, echo parameters and TAC by all three methods were then compared. TAC (ml mm Hg–1) by the PPM was 1.24±0.51, by the AM 1.84±0.90 and by the SVPP 1.96±0.76 (P<0.0001 between groups). Correlation was good between all methods: PPM/AM r=0.83, PPM/SVPP r=0.94 and AM/SVPP r=0.80 (all P<0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed significant differences between patients with and those without cardiovascular risk for all three methods; TAC–AM and TAC–SVPP values were similar and significantly higher than TAC–PPM. The only significant relationships observed with TAC and echo parameters were in left ventricular (LV) septal thickness (R2=0.07; P<0.0001) and LV mass (R2=0.04; P=0.004). Normal and abnormal values of TAC vary according to method, which should be expressed. Each of the techniques shows good correlation with each other, however, values for TAC–PPM are significantly lower. TAC–PPM and TAC–SVPP are comparable in determining differences between groups with and without cardiovascular risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Bortel LM, Balkestein EJ, van der Heijden-Spek JJ, Vanmolkot FH, Staessen JA, Kragten JA et al. Non-invasive assessment of local arterial pulse pressure: comparison of applanation tonometry and echo-tracking. J Hypertens 2001; 19 (6): 1037–1044.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cameron JD, Jennings GL, Dart AM . Systemic arterial compliance is decreased in newly-diagnosed patients with coronary heart disease: implications for prediction of risk. J Cardiovasc Risk 1996; 3 (6): 495–500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kingwell BA . Large artery stiffness: implications for exercise capacity and cardiovascular risk. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2002; 29 (3): 214–217.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Haluska BA, Jeffriess L, Downey M, Carlier SG, Marwick TH . Influence of cardiovascular risk factors on total arterial compliance. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2008; 21 (2): 123–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stergiopulos N, Segers P, Westerhof N . Use of pulse pressure method for estimating total arterial compliance in vivo. Am J Physiol 1999; 276 (2 Pt 2): H424–H428.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Segers P, Verdonck P, Deryck Y, Brimioulle S, Naeije R, Carlier S et al. Pulse pressure method and the area method for the estimation of total arterial compliance in dogs: sensitivity to wave reflection intensity. Ann Biomed Eng 1999; 27 (4): 480–485.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schiller NB, Shah PM, Crawford M, DeMaria A, Devereux R, Feigenbaum H et al. Recommendations for quantitation of the left ventricle by two-dimensional echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography Committee on Standards, Subcommittee on Quantitation of Two-Dimensional Echocardiograms. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1989; 2 (5): 358–367.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Segers P, Carlier S, Pasquet A, Rabben SI, Hellevik LR, Remme E et al. Individualizing the aorto-radial pressure transfer function: feasibility of a model-based approach. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2000; 279 (2): H542–H549.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Carlier S, Segers P, De Backer T, Stergiopoulos N, Thomas J . The pulse pressure method for non-invasive evaluation of total arterial compliance. J Hyperts 2000; 18: S197.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Stergiopulos N, Meister JJ, Westerhof N . Evaluation of methods for estimation of total arterial compliance. Am J Physiol 1995; 268 (4 Pt 2): H1540–H1548.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu Z, Brin KP, Yin FC . Estimation of total arterial compliance: an improved method and evaluation of current methods. Am J Physiol 1986; 251 (3 Pt 2): H588–H600.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chemla D, Hebert JL, Coirault C, Zamani K, Suard I, Colin P et al. Total arterial compliance estimated by stroke volume-to-aortic pulse pressure ratio in humans. Am J Physiol 1998; 274 (2 Pt 2): H500–H505.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Quinones MA, Otto CM, Stoddard M, Waggoner A, Zoghbi WA . Recommendations for quantification of Doppler echocardiography: a report from the Doppler Quantification Task Force of the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2002; 15 (2): 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stergiopulos N, Meister JJ, Westerhof N . Simple and accurate way for estimating total and segmental arterial compliance: the pulse pressure method. Ann Biomed Eng 1994; 22 (4): 392–397.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mottram PM, Haluska BA, Leano R, Carlier S, Case C, Marwick TH . Relation of arterial stiffness to diastolic dysfunction in hypertensive heart disease. Heart 2005; 91 (12): 1551–1556.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Liang YL, Cameron JD, Teede H, Kotsopoulos D, McGrath BP . Reproducibility of arterial compliance and carotid wall thickness measurements in normal subjects. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 1998; 25 (7–8): 618–620.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Beltran A, McVeigh G, Morgan D, Glasser SP, Neutel JM, Weber M et al. Arterial compliance abnormalities in isolated systolic hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2001; 14 (10): 1007–1011.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lind L . Arterial compliance and endothelium-dependent vasodilation are independently related to coronary risk in the elderly: the Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) study. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2008; 28: 373–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Bortel LM, Spek JJ . Influence of aging on arterial compliance. J Hum Hypertens 1998; 12 (9): 583–586.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Haluska BA, Jeffriess L, Fathi RB, Mottram PM, Carlier SG, Marwick TH . Pulse pressure vs total arterial compliance as a marker of arterial health. Eur J Clin Invest 2005; 35 (7): 438–443.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. O’Rourke MF, Staessen JA, Vlachopoulos C, Duprez D, Plante GE . Clinical applications of arterial stiffness; definitions and reference values. Am J Hypertens 2002; 15 (5): 426–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. de Simone G, Roman MJ, Koren MJ, Mensah GA, Ganau A, Devereux RB . Stroke volume/pulse pressure ratio and cardiovascular risk in arterial hypertension. Hypertension 1999; 33 (3): 800–805.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Stergiopulos N, Westerhof BE, Westerhof N . Total arterial inertance as the fourth element of the Windkessel model. Am J Physiol 1999; 276 (1 Pt 2): H81–H88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Breit SN, O’Rourke MF . Comparison of direct and indirect arterial pressure measurements in hospitalized patients. Aust N Z J Med 1974; 4 (5): 485–491.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Watson S, Wenzel RR, di Matteo C, Meier B, Luscher TF . Accuracy of a new wrist cuff oscillometric blood pressure device: comparisons with intraarterial and mercury manometer measurements. Am J Hypertens 1998; 11 (12): 1469–1474.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was made possible by ongoing support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Princess Alexandra Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Queensland School of Medicine, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    B A Haluska, L Jeffriess, J Brown, S Carlier & T H Marwick

Authors
  1. B A Haluska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L Jeffriess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S Carlier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T H Marwick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B A Haluska.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haluska, B., Jeffriess, L., Brown, J. et al. A comparison of methods for assessing total arterial compliance. J Hum Hypertens 24, 254–262 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2009.92

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2009.92

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links