Theoretical investigation into methods of detecting pulmonary arteriovenous blood shunts

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT

Continuous retinal vessel diameter m easurements: the future in retinal vessel assessment?

PURPOSE. To establish an alternative method, sequential and diameter response analysis (SDRA), to determine dynamic retinal vessel responses and their time course in serial stimulation compared with the established method of averaged diameter responses and standard static assessment. METHODS. SDRA focuses on individual time and diameter responses, taking into account the fluctuation in baseline diameter, providing improved insight into reaction patterns when compared with established methods as delivered by retinal vessel analyzer (RVA) software. SDRA patterns were developed with measurements from 78 healthy nonsmokers and subsequently validated in a group of 21 otherwise healthy smokers. Fundus photography and retinal vessel responses were assessed by RVA, intraocular pressure by contact tonometry, and blood pressure by sphygmomanometry. RESULTS. Compared with the RVA software method, SDRA demonstrated a marked difference in retinal vessel responses to flickering light (P 0.05). As a validation of that finding, SDRA showed a strong relation between baseline retinal vessel diameter and subsequent dilatory response in both healthy subjects and smokers (P 0.001). The RVA software was unable to detect this difference or to find a difference in retinal vessel arteriovenous ratio between smokers and nonsmokers (P 0.243). However, SDRA revealed that smokers’ vessels showed both an increased level of arterial baseline diameter fluctuation before flicker stimulation (P 0.005) and an increased stiffness of retinal arterioles (P 0.035) compared with those in nonsmokers. These differences were unrelated to intraocular pressure or systemic blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS. SDRA shows promise as a tool for the assessment of vessel physiology. Further studies are needed to explore its application in patients with vascular diseases.

Comparison of two formulas used to calculate summarized retinal vessel calibers

PURPOSE: To compare the Parr-Hubbard and Knudtson formulas to calculate retinal vessel calibers and to examine the effect of omitting vessels on the overall result. METHODS: We calculated the central retinal arterial equivalent (CRAE) and central retinal venular equivalent (CRVE) according to the formulas described by Parr-Hubbard and Knudtson including the six largest retinal arterioles and venules crossing through a concentric ring segment (measurement zone) around the optic nerve head. Once calculated, we removed one arbitrarily selected artery and one arbitrarily selected vein and recalculated all outcome parameters again for (1) omitting one artery only, (2) omitting one vein only, and (3) omitting one artery and one vein. All parameters were compared against each other. RESULTS: Both methods showed good correlation (r for CRAE = 0.58; r for CRVE = 0.84), but absolute values for CRAE and CRVE were significantly different from each other when comparing both methods (p < 0.000001): CRAE had higher values for the Parr-Hubbard (165 [±16] μm) method compared with the Knudtson method (148 [±15] μm). In addition, CRAE and CRVE values dropped for both methods when omitting one arbitrarily selected vessel each (all p < 0.000001). Arteriovenous ratio (AVR) calculations showed a similar change for both methods when omitting one vessel each: AVR decreased when omitting one arteriole whereas it increased when omitting one venule. No change, however, was observed for AVR calculated with six or five vessel pairs each. CONCLUSIONS: Although the absolute value for CRAE and CRVE is changing significantly depending on the number of vessels included, AVR appears to be comparable as long as the same number of arterioles and venules is included.