A double-blinded placebo-controlled investigation into the effect of therapeutic ultrasound on radial artery blood flow

Aim: To investigate the effect of therapeutic and sham ultrasound on radial artery blood flow (m.s-1) and radial arterial lumen diameter (mm). Subjects: Fifty healthy asymptomatic volunteers between the ages of 18-38 years. Methodology: The subjects were randomly allocated into one of five intervention groups (A-E). Group A received continuous ultrasound at 0.2 W.cm-² for 5 minutes, Group B received pulse ultrasound at 0.2 W.cm-² for 5 minutes, Group C received continuous ultrasound at 1.5 W.cm-² for 5 minutes, Group D received pulse ultrasound at 1.5 W.cm-² for 5 minutes and Group E received sham ultrasound at 0 W.cm-² for 5 minutes. Baseline radial artery blood flow (m.s-1) and radial artery lumen diameter (mm) readings were taken prior to the commencement of the therapeutic or sham ultrasound application using a Doppler ultrasound. At four minutes of application (during the therapeutic or sham ultrasound application), another set of blood flow and arterial lumen diameter measurements were taken. The final blood flow and arterial lumen diameter measurements were taken one minute after the therapeutic or sham ultrasound application was stopped. Results: The mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow and radial artery lumen diameter at baseline was 0.197 (± 0.060) m.s-1 and 2.4 (± 0.6) mm respectively. In Group A, the mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow during ultrasound application and one-minute after ultrasound application was 0.193 (± 0.070) m.s-1 and 0.179 (± 0.073) m.s-1 respectively. The mean (± SD) radial artery lumen diameter in Group A at the two time intervals was 2.2 (± 0.5) mm and 2.2 (± 0.3) mm respectively. In Group B, the mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow during ultrasound application and one-minute after ultrasound application was 0.187 (± 0.067) m.s-1 and 0.195 (± 0.041) m.s-1 respectively. The mean (± SD) radial artery lumen diameter in Group B at the two time intervals was 2.4 (± 0.4) mm and 2.3 (± 0.5) mm respectively. In Group C, the mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow during ultrasound application and one-minute after ultrasound application was 0.225 (± 0.088) m.s-1 and 0.186 (± 0.071) m.s-1 respectively. The mean (± SD) radial artery lumen diameter in Group C at the two time intervals was 2.4 (± 0.7) mm and 2.7 (± 0.8) mm respectively. In Group D, the mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow during ultrasound application and one-minute after ultrasound application was 0.215 (± 0.080) m.s-1 and 0.200 (± 0.081) m.s-1 respectively. The mean (± SD) radial artery lumen diameter in Group iv D at the two time intervals was 2.4 (± 0.8) mm and 2.4 (± 0.7) mm respectively. In Group E, the mean (± SD) radial artery blood flow during ultrasound application and one-minute after ultrasound application was 0.200 (± 0.067) m.s-1 and 0.182 (± 0.075) m.s-1 respectively. The mean (± SD) radial artery lumen diameter in Group E at the two time intervals was 2.5 (± 0.7) mm and 2.3 (± 0.5) mm respectively. There was no significant change in radial artery blood flow and radial artery lumen diameter over time in any individual group or between groups (p > 0.05; repeated measures ANOVA). There was an overall weak positive correlation between radial artery blood flow and radial artery lumen diameter at baseline (r = 0.508), during (r = 0.541) and after (r = 0.532) the therapeutic or sham ultrasound application. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that continuous, pulse or sham ultrasound had no significant effect on radial artery blood flow and radial artery lumen diameter. Furthermore, active ultrasound (continuous and pulse) was not superior to sham ultrasound in significantly affecting blood flow in a muscular artery.