Article: A comparison of the approaches to assess the abdominal aortic stiffness using M-mode ultrasonography, tissue tracking and strain rate imaging
| creativeworkseries.issn | JNMA Print ISSN: 0028-2715; Online ISSN: 1815-672X | |
| dc.contributor.author | Xiao-Zhi Zheng | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bin Yang | |
| dc.contributor.author | Jing Wu | |
| dc.creator.affiliation | Nanjing University School of Medicine;The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University (The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng) | |
| dc.creator.affiliation | Jinling Hospital, Nanjing University School of Medicine. | |
| dc.creator.affiliation | The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University (The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng) | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-10-13T05:48:51Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-10-13T05:48:51Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Abstract Introduction: Which kind of ultrasound imaging technique is suitable for the assessment of the abdominal aortic stiffness are seldom reported. The purposes of this study were to explore a reliable method to evaluate the abdominal aortic stiffness in patients with hypertension among the following ultrasound imaging techniques: M-mode ultrasonography (M-mode), tissue tracking and strain rate imaging. Methods: Fifty patients with hypertension and fifty age and sex-matched healthy volunteers were involved in this study. The displacement (d), the peak strain (ε) and the peak strain rate (s) were obtained from the long-axis images of the abdominal aorta using tissue tracking and strain rate imaging, respectively. The pressure strain elastic modulus (Ep), β stiffness index and distensibility were calculated according to the conventional formulas using M-mode combined with the blood pressure. Results: Compared to the normal subjects, the difference between systolic diameters and diastolic diameters (Δdiameter), the displacement of posterior wall (d-posterior), the difference of the displacement between anterior and posterior wall (Δ displacement), and the distensibility decreased and the Ep and β stiffness index increased in the hypertension patients There were no significant differences between the patients with hypertension and the normal subjects according to the ε, s. Among Δdiameters, d-posterior, Δdisplacement, the ε and s, only Δdiameters significantly correlated with the Ep, β stiffness index and the distensibility in hypertension patients. Conclusions: Strain rate imaging cannot sensitively discriminate the difference of the abdominal aortic stiffness between patients with hypertension and the normal subjects. M-mode ultrasonography is still a classical method for accessing the aortic elasticity. Keywords: Abdominal aortic elasticity; Hypertension M-mode ultrasonography; Strain rate imaging; Tissue tracking. | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.31729/jnma.1596 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14572/8144 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.publisher | Nepal Medical Association | |
| dc.subject | Abdominal aortic elasticity | |
| dc.subject | Hypertension M-mode ultrasonography | |
| dc.subject | Strain rate imaging | |
| dc.subject | Tissue tracking | |
| dc.title | A comparison of the approaches to assess the abdominal aortic stiffness using M-mode ultrasonography, tissue tracking and strain rate imaging | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| local.article.type | Original Article | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 504 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 500 | |
| relation.isJournalIssueOfPublication | 0ef2497e-3e88-4082-8818-a7393d43bb73 | |
| relation.isJournalIssueOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | 0ef2497e-3e88-4082-8818-a7393d43bb73 | |
| relation.isJournalOfPublication | e6e146a0-0ece-4aba-aa0a-6ccfbd10a12a |