Back to Journals » Vascular Health and Risk Management » Volume 8

Accuracy of the ankle-brachial index using the SCVL®, an arm and ankle automated device with synchronized cuffs, in a population with increased cardiovascular risk

Authors Rosenbaum D, Rodriguez-Carranza S, Laroche P, Bruckert E, Giral P, Girerd X

Received 22 December 2011

Accepted for publication 9 February 2012

Published 17 April 2012 Volume 2012:8 Pages 239—246

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S29405

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

David Rosenbaum1,2, Sandra Rodriguez-Carranza1,3, Patrick Laroche4, Eric Bruckert1,2, Philippe Giral1,2, Xavier Girerd1,2
1Unité de Prévention Cardiovasculaire, Service d'Endocrinologie-Métabolisme, Assistance Publique/Hôpitaux de Paris, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière – Université Pierre et Marie Curie, 2Dyslipoproteinemia and Atherosclerosis Research Unit, National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM) and Pierre et Marie Curie University (UPMC – Paris VI), Paris, France; 3Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán Departamento de Endocrinología y Metabolismo, Delegación Tlalpan, México Distrito Federal; 4STACTIS, Paris, France

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the ankle brachial index (ABI) measured with the SCVL® (“screening cardiovascular lab”; GenNov, Paris, France), an automated device with synchronized arm and ankle cuffs with an automatic ABI calculation.
Methods: Patients were consecutively included in a cardiovascular prevention unit if they presented with at least two cardiovascular risk factors. ABI measurements were made using the SCVL, following a synchronized assessment of brachial and ankle systolic pressure. These values were compared to the ABI obtained with the usual Doppler-assisted method.
Results: We included 157 patients. Mean age was 59.1 years, 56.8% had hypertension, 22.3% had diabetes mellitus, and 17.6% were current smokers. An abnormal ABI was observed in 17.2% with the SCVL and in 16.2% with the Doppler. The prevalence rates of an abnormal ABI by patient measured with each device, ie, 15.7% (confidence interval [CI] 0.95: [11.8; 20.4]) or 14.3% (CI 0.95: [10.7; 18.9]), did not differ. The coefficient of variation of Doppler and SCVL measures was 15.8% and 15.1%, respectively. The regression line between the two measurement methods was statistically significant. The value-to-value comparison also shows a difference of mean equal to 0.010 (CI 0.95: [–0.272; 0.291]) (r = –0.055). Reproducibility of ABI measurements with the SCVL showed a difference of mean equal to 0.009 (CI 0.95: [–0.203; 0.222]), without heteroscedasticity (r = –0.003).
Conclusion: The SCVL is a fast and easy to use automated oscillometric device for the determination of ABI. The use of this two-synchronized-cuff device correlates well with the gold standard Doppler ultrasound method and is reproducible. The SCVL may ease the screening for peripheral arterial disease in routine medical practice.

Keywords: ankle brachial index, automated device, peripheral arterial disease screening

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Readers of this article also read:

Fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: where to after FAME 2?

van de Hoef TP, Meuwissen M, Piek JJ

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2015, 11:613-622

Published Date: 3 December 2015

The potential of medical device industry in technological and economical context

Maresova P, Penhaker M, Selamat A, Kuca K

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:1505-1514

Published Date: 3 October 2015

Patient preference and ease of use for different coagulation factor VIII reconstitution device scenarios: a cross-sectional survey in five European countries

Cimino E, Linari S, Malerba M, Halimeh S, Biondo F, Westfeld M

Patient Preference and Adherence 2014, 8:1713-1720

Published Date: 12 December 2014

Blood pressure and blood viscosity are not correlated in normal healthy subjects

Salazar Vázquez BY

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2012, 8:1-6

Published Date: 30 December 2011

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010

Critical appraisal of a fixed combination of esomeprazole and low dose aspirin in risk reduction

Ravi Vachhani, Doumit Bouhaidar, Alvin Zfass, et al

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2010, 6:287-292

Published Date: 22 June 2010