Critical analysis of autoregressive and fast Fourier transform markers of cardiovascular variability in rats and humans

• Main Authors: G.J.J. Silva, M.R. Ushizima, P.S. Lessa, L. Cardoso, L.F. Drager, M.M. Atala, F.M. Consolim-Colombo, H.F. Lopes, I.A. Cestari, J.E. Krieger, E.M. Krieger
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica 2009-04-01
• Series: Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
• Subjects: Fast Fourier transform; Autoregressive model; Hypertension; SHR; Pharmacological blockade; Tilt test
• Online Access: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2009000400012

The autonomic nervous system plays an important role in physiological and pathological conditions, and has been extensively evaluated by parametric and non-parametric spectral analysis. To compare the results obtained with fast Fourier transform (FFT) and the autoregressive (AR) method, we performed a comprehensive comparative study using data from humans and rats during pharmacological blockade (in rats), a postural test (in humans), and in the hypertensive state (in both humans and rats). Although postural hypotension in humans induced an increase in normalized low-frequency (LFnu) of systolic blood pressure, the increase in the ratio was detected only by AR. In rats, AR and FFT analysis did not agree for LFnu and high frequency (HFnu) under basal conditions and after vagal blockade. The increase in the LF/HF ratio of the pulse interval, induced by methylatropine, was detected only by FFT. In hypertensive patients, changes in LF and HF for systolic blood pressure were observed only by AR; FFT was able to detect the reduction in both blood pressure variance and total power. In hypertensive rats, AR presented different values of variance and total power for systolic blood pressure. Moreover, AR and FFT presented discordant results for LF, LFnu, HF, LF/HF ratio, and total power for pulse interval. We provide evidence for disagreement in 23% of the indices of blood pressure and heart rate variability in humans and 67% discordance in rats when these variables are evaluated by AR and FFT under physiological and pathological conditions. The overall disagreement between AR and FFT in this study was 43%.