• Seong S Chuah, Peter I Woolfson, Brian R Pullan, and Philip S Lewis.
• The Blood Pressure and Heart Research Centre, Stepping Hill Hospital, Stockport, Cheshire, UK. somchuah@doctors.org.uk
• Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2004 Sep 1; 24 (5): 296-303.

AbstractLimb blood flow is widely used as an indicator of the human vascular properties. There are only few non-invasive methods for its measurement such as venous occlusion plethysmography. However, several authors have questioned its validity. The problems appear to be related to the process of venous occlusion. We developed two methods to measure forearm blood flow by plethysmography without venous occlusion in combination with Doppler velocimetry (without imaging). Method 1: the gradient of a tangent drawn on the latter part of the down stroke of the plethysmographic volume pulse is an approximation of venous blood flow in the absence of diastolic blood flow. At equilibrium, it equals the average arterial flow in a cardiac cycle. The Doppler velocity waveform recorded simultaneously allows improvement of this approximation when there is diastolic blood flow. Method 2: the volume pulse detected by a plethysmograph calibrated in absolute volume is used to calibrate the velocity waveform recorded simultaneously to produce an approximation of arterial volumetric flow waveform. Bland-Altman analysis shows both methods have good correlation and agreement with venous occlusion plethysmography at rest. Method 1: mean difference (blood flow measured by venous occlusion minus calculated flow) = 0.10 ml/pulse (+/-0.18), limits of agreement = -0.41 and 0.61 ml/pulse. Method 2: mean difference = -0.041 ml/pulse (+/-0.15), limits of agreement = -0.45 and 0.37 ml/pulse. During hyperaemia, venous occlusion plethysmography grossly underestimated relative to the new methods. The new methods are not dependent on venous occlusion and produce consistent results with or without hyperaemia.

22 keywords...

hide…