Association of Haemodynamic Indices of Central and Peripheral Pressure with Subclinical Target Organ Damage.

IF 7.3 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Pulse Pub Date : 2018-03-01 Epub Date: 2017-11-25 DOI:10.1159/000484441
Junli Zuo, Shaoli Chu, Isabella Tan, Mark Butlin, Jiehui Zhao, Alberto Avolio
{"title":"Association of Haemodynamic Indices of Central and Peripheral Pressure with Subclinical Target Organ Damage.","authors":"Junli Zuo,&nbsp;Shaoli Chu,&nbsp;Isabella Tan,&nbsp;Mark Butlin,&nbsp;Jiehui Zhao,&nbsp;Alberto Avolio","doi":"10.1159/000484441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Central aortic pressure has often been shown to be more closely associated with markers of vascular function and incidence of cardiovascular events compared to peripheral pressure. However, the potential clinical use of central aortic or peripheral haemodynamic indices as markers of target organ damage (TOD) has not been fully established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated associations of TOD with central aortic and peripheral haemodynamic indices (central aortic [cPP] and peripheral pulse pressure [pPP], central aortic augmentation index, and central and peripheral waveform factor) in 770 hospital inpatients (age 60 ± 10 years, 473 males) with primary hypertension. TOD was quantified in terms of arterial stiffness as measured by carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), carotid intima-media thickness (IMT), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR). Subclinical TOD was defined as carotid IMT >0.9 mm, urine ACR >3.5 mg/mmol in females and >2.5 mg/mmol in males and/or cfPWV >12 m/s.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both cPP and pPP showed significant correlation with cfPWV (<i>r =</i> 0.41 vs. 0.40; <i>p</i> < 0.01), ACR (<i>r =</i> 0.24 vs. 0.27; <i>p</i> < 0.01) and carotid IMT (<i>r</i> = 0.14 vs. 0.15; <i>p</i> < 0.01). Each SD increase in pPP and cPP was associated with increased risk of cfPWV >12 m/s (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7 and 2.9 for pPP and cPP, respectively), ACR >2.5 mg/mmol (OR = 1.2 and 1.4, respectively), and carotid IMT >0.9 mm (OR = 1.46 and 1.53, respectively). Compared to pPP, cPP had higher predictive power for TOD for age ≥60 years (OR = 3.07, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although both pPP and cPP show an association with TOD in a hypertensive population, cPP provides additional information beyond pPP associated with TOD in a hypertensive cohort. Central aortic haemodynamic indices as potential biomarkers of subclinical TOD need to be validated by further prospective studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":29774,"journal":{"name":"Pulse","volume":"5 1-4","pages":"133-143"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000484441","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000484441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/11/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Central aortic pressure has often been shown to be more closely associated with markers of vascular function and incidence of cardiovascular events compared to peripheral pressure. However, the potential clinical use of central aortic or peripheral haemodynamic indices as markers of target organ damage (TOD) has not been fully established.

Methods: We evaluated associations of TOD with central aortic and peripheral haemodynamic indices (central aortic [cPP] and peripheral pulse pressure [pPP], central aortic augmentation index, and central and peripheral waveform factor) in 770 hospital inpatients (age 60 ± 10 years, 473 males) with primary hypertension. TOD was quantified in terms of arterial stiffness as measured by carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), carotid intima-media thickness (IMT), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR). Subclinical TOD was defined as carotid IMT >0.9 mm, urine ACR >3.5 mg/mmol in females and >2.5 mg/mmol in males and/or cfPWV >12 m/s.

Results: Both cPP and pPP showed significant correlation with cfPWV (r = 0.41 vs. 0.40; p < 0.01), ACR (r = 0.24 vs. 0.27; p < 0.01) and carotid IMT (r = 0.14 vs. 0.15; p < 0.01). Each SD increase in pPP and cPP was associated with increased risk of cfPWV >12 m/s (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7 and 2.9 for pPP and cPP, respectively), ACR >2.5 mg/mmol (OR = 1.2 and 1.4, respectively), and carotid IMT >0.9 mm (OR = 1.46 and 1.53, respectively). Compared to pPP, cPP had higher predictive power for TOD for age ≥60 years (OR = 3.07, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Although both pPP and cPP show an association with TOD in a hypertensive population, cPP provides additional information beyond pPP associated with TOD in a hypertensive cohort. Central aortic haemodynamic indices as potential biomarkers of subclinical TOD need to be validated by further prospective studies.

Abstract Image

中枢和外周压血流动力学指标与亚临床靶器官损伤的关系。
背景:与外周压相比,中央主动脉压经常被证明与血管功能和心血管事件发生率的标志物更密切相关。然而,中心主动脉或外周血流动力学指标作为靶器官损伤(TOD)标志物的潜在临床应用尚未完全确定。方法:对770例住院原发性高血压患者(年龄60±10岁,男性473例)进行TOD与中央主动脉和外周血流动力学指标(中央主动脉[cPP]和外周脉压[pPP]、中央主动脉增强指数、中央和外周波形因子)的相关性分析。通过颈动脉-股动脉脉波速度(cfPWV)、颈动脉内膜-中膜厚度(IMT)和尿白蛋白-肌酐比(ACR)测量动脉硬度来量化TOD。亚临床TOD定义为颈动脉IMT >0.9 mm,女性尿ACR >3.5 mg/mmol,男性>2.5 mg/mmol和/或cfPWV >12 m/s。结果:cPP、pPP与cfPWV均有显著相关(r = 0.41 vs. 0.40;p < 0.01), ACR (r = 0.24 vs. 0.27;p < 0.01)和颈动脉IMT (r = 0.14 vs. 0.15;P < 0.01)。pPP和cPP每增加一个SD,与cfPWV >12 m/s (pPP和cPP的比值比分别为2.7和2.9)、ACR >2.5 mg/mmol (OR分别为1.2和1.4)和颈动脉IMT >0.9 mm (OR分别为1.46和1.53)的风险增加相关。与pPP相比,cPP对年龄≥60岁的TOD具有更高的预测能力(OR = 3.07, p < 0.001)。结论:虽然pPP和cPP在高血压人群中都显示与TOD相关,但cPP在高血压人群中提供了pPP与TOD相关的额外信息。中央主动脉血流动力学指标作为亚临床TOD的潜在生物标志物需要进一步的前瞻性研究来验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
4.50%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信