Compatibility of pulse–pulse intervals with R–R intervals in assessing cardiac autonomic function and its relation to risks of atherosclerosis

Tzu Chi Medical Journal

article

Cheuk‑Kwan Sun¹  Cyuan‑Cin Liu²  Wei‑Min Liu³  Hsien‑Tsai Wu²  Ruay‑Ming Huang⁴  An‑Bang Liu⁵ 

[1] Department of Emergency  Medicine, E‑Da Hospital and  I‑Shou University College of  Medicine;Department of Electrical  Engineering, National Dong Hwa  University;Department of Computer  Science and Information  Engineering, National Chung  Cheng University;Department of  Internal Medicine, Hualien  Hospital, Ministry of Health  and Welfare;Department  of Neurology, Buddhist Tzu Chi  General Hospital and Tzu Chi  University

关键词: Cross‑approximate entropy;    Heart rate variability;    Pulse transit time;     R–R intervals;   

DOI  :  10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_68_18

来源: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications

【 摘 要 】

Objective: Heart rate variability (HRV) analysis using electrocardiographic R–R intervals (RRIs) in either a time or a frequency domain is a useful tool for assessing cardiacautonomic dysfunction in clinical research. For convenience, pulse–pulse intervals (PPIs) acquired by photoplethysmography have been used to assess HRV. However, the compatibility of PPI with RRI is controversial. Materials and Methods: In this study, we investigated the compatibility of PPI with RRI in five groups of participants, including nonoverweight young individuals with a body mass index (BMI) <24 kg/m2 (Group 1, n = 20, aged 18–40 years), overweight young individuals with a BMI ≥24 kg/m2 (Group 2, n = 13, aged 21–38 years), nonoverweight upper middle‑aged individuals with a BMI <24 kg/m2 (Group 3, n = 21, aged 45–89 years), overweight upper middle‑aged individuals with a BMI ≥24 kg/m2 (Group 4, n = 14, aged 43–74 years), and diabetic patients with a BMI ≥24 kg/m2 (Group 5, n = 19, aged 35–74 years). We then used cross‑approximate entropy (CAE) to assess the compatibility between RRI and PPI and analyzed HRV in the time and frequency domains derived from PPR and RRI with traditional methods. Results: The CAE values in Group 1 were significantly lower than those in Group 2 (1.68 ± 0.16 vs. 1.78 ± 0.15, P = 0.041), Group 3 (1.68 ± 0.16 vs. 2.05 ± 0.27, P < 0.001), Group 4 (1.68 ± 0.16 vs. 1.87 ± 0.23, P = 0.023), and Group 5 (1.68 ± 0.16 vs. 2.09 ± 0.23, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in HRV acquired by PPI and RRI, except for proportion of pairs of adjacent NN intervals differing by more than 50 ms in the entire recording in Group 1. All HRVs derived from PPI were different from those acquired from RRI in the other groups. Conclusion: PPI may be an alternative parameter for effectively assessing cardiac autonomic function in nonoverweight healthy individuals. It should be used carefully in overweight, elderly, or diabetic individuals.

【 授权许可】

Unknown