| Research Abstract |
We compared Ees/Ea with other general circulatory monitoring, and made clear the significance of Ees/Ea as circulatory monitoring. In myocardial infarction group, Ees/Ea value was significantly smaller (0.87±0.07), in comparison with hypertension group (1.46±0.29) and healthy group (2.17±0.29). On the other hand, as for augmentation index and pulse wave velocity, the significant difference was not recognized between myocardial infarction group and hypertension group. Thus, it was suggested that the integrated cardiovascular function, which was not provided from other indexes, can be measured with present methods. Furthermore, Ees/Ea measured by the present method correlated with the ejection fraction measured by an echocardiography (R=0.79; RMSE=0.08). In addition, the normal Ees/Ea range measured by the present method, agreed to a reported range measured by conventional methods. In the child group, Ees/Ea was slightly larger than the adult group, although the significant difference was not observed. Thus, the Ees/Ea measurement by this calculation method is expected to become the superior index, which distinguishes the cardiovascular function. In a study of monitoring Ees/Ea from periphery radial arterial pressure, we used 4 elements (arterial compliance, peripheral resistance, aortic characteristic impedance, inertia) for arterial vascular system, and examined the nature of pressure transmitting by 4 elements. As a result, aortic waveform was estimated from radial arterial pressure with the model transfer function which satisfied the circulatory dynamics. This study was an important strategy to estimate aortic pressure waveform from periphery radial arterial pressure waveform under various circulatory dynamics, which is important for on-line estimation of cardiovascular performance.
|
