Is the Origin of Korotkoff Sounds Rooted in the Resonance of the Arterial Wall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Swamp Thing
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Biology Origin
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the current understanding of Korotkoff sounds, particularly in light of a 2015 paper proposing that these sounds arise from the arterial wall acting as a resonant system, producing transient excitations. This hypothesis has garnered some acceptance, but critiques exist, suggesting that the understanding of Korotkoff sounds remains complex and not fully settled. The interest in this topic ties into broader discussions about blood pressure (BP) measurement techniques. It is emphasized that BP readings are dynamic snapshots influenced by various factors, including patient anxiety and physiological changes, rather than static values. Clinicians must navigate these uncertainties, often requiring multiple measurements to account for variability and ensure accurate assessments.
Swamp Thing
Insights Author
Messages
1,031
Reaction score
769
What is the "official" thinking today about the origin of Korotkoff sounds?

Has this 2015 paper found general acceptance?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1933171115007068

The idea IIUC is that the stretched arterial wall acts as a resonant system, and what we hear are transient excitations of this resonator.

Have there been critiques of this hypothesis?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
jim mcnamara said:
Um, why is this of interest....?
It might be related to their recent thread asking about taking BP measurements:

Swamp Thing said:
Is it ok to gently squeeze the bulb just after crossing the systolic or diastolic threshold, just to make sure of the exact value?
 
Oooh. Not a good assumption. BP mensuration results are a snapshot of a changing system. It is not a fixed unchanging declaration of a static system, more like a sample.

Its is a hydrostatic pressure measurement at a moment in time:
From the text above:
The pressure in a liquid at a given depth is called the hydrostatic pressure. This can be calculated using the hydrostatic equation: P = rho * g * d, where P is the pressure, rho is the density of the liquid, g is gravity (9.8 m/s^2) and d is the depth (or height) of the liquid.

During measurement if the patient raises an arm it changes the result. Changes in hormone levels like cortisol can really mess up readings - e.g., a kid getting a BP who is petrified of the whole process. So the result is not necessarily indicative of other pathologies. Clinicians know this and have to deal with the uncertainty - maybe by getting a series of readings or giving the kid a lollipop. Or treating the result as a sample of a population of these readings, and have, through experience, generated a working idea of true outliers caused by medical problems. And otherwise just go with the result as frightened kid "normal"
 
  • Like
Likes Swamp Thing and pinball1970
https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/conditions/body-dysmorphia/ Most people have some mild apprehension about their body, such as one thinks their nose is too big, hair too straight or curvy. At the extreme, cases such as this, are difficult to completely understand. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/health/other/why-would-someone-want-to-amputate-healthy-limbs/ar-AA1MrQK7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=68ce4014b1fe4953b0b4bd22ef471ab9&ei=78 they feel like they're an amputee in the body of a regular person "For...
Thread 'Did they discover another descendant of homo erectus?'
The study provides critical new insights into the African Humid Period, a time between 14,500 and 5,000 years ago when the Sahara desert was a green savanna, rich in water bodies that facilitated human habitation and the spread of pastoralism. Later aridification turned this region into the world's largest desert. Due to the extreme aridity of the region today, DNA preservation is poor, making this pioneering ancient DNA study all the more significant. Genomic analyses reveal that the...
Whenever these opiods are mentioned they usually mention that e.g. fentanyl is "50 times stronger than heroin" and "100 times stronger than morphine". Now it's nitazene which the public is told is everything from "much stronger than heroin" and "200 times stronger than fentany"! Do these numbers make sense at all? How do they arrive at them? Kill thousands of mice? En passant: nitazene have already been found in both Oxycontin pills and in street "heroin" here, so Naloxone is more...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top