OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the relationship between central pressure profiles and cardiovascular events (CVEs) in a large community-based sample. BACKGROUND: Experimental and physiologic data mechanistically implicate wave reflections in the pathogenesis of left ventricular failure and cardiovascular disease, but their association with these outcomes in the general population is unclear. METHODS: Aortic pressure waveforms were derived from a generalized transfer function applied to the radial pressure waveform recorded noninvasively from 5,960 participants in the Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. The central pressure waveform was separated into forward and reflected waves using a physiologic flow waveform. Reflection magnitude (RM = [Reflected/Forward wave amplitude] × 100), augmentation index ([Second/First systolic peak] × 100) and pulse pressure amplification ([Radial/aortic pulse pressure] × 100) were assessed as predictors of CVEs and congestive heart failure (CHF) during a median follow-up of 7.61 years. RESULTS: After adjustment for established risk factors, aortic AIx independently predicted hard CVEs (hazard ratio [HR] per 10% increase: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 1.14; p = 0.016), whereas PPA independently predicted all CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.96; p = 0.012). RM was independently predictive of all CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.67; p = 0.009) and hard CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.90; p = 0.006) and was strongly predictive of new-onset CHF (HR per 10% increase: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.79 to 4.04; p < 0.0001), comparing favorably to other risk factors for CHF as per various measures of model performance, reclassification, and discrimination. In a fully adjusted model, compared to nonhypertensive subjects with low RM, the HRs (95% CI) for hypertensive subjects with low RM, nonhypertensive subjects with high RM, and hypertensive subjects with high RM were 1.81 (0.85 to 3.86), 2.16 (1.07 to 5.01), and 3.98 (1.96 to 8.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Arterial wave reflections represent a novel strong risk factor for CHF in the general population.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the relationship between central pressure profiles and cardiovascular events (CVEs) in a large community-based sample. BACKGROUND: Experimental and physiologic data mechanistically implicate wave reflections in the pathogenesis of left ventricular failure and cardiovascular disease, but their association with these outcomes in the general population is unclear. METHODS: Aortic pressure waveforms were derived from a generalized transfer function applied to the radial pressure waveform recorded noninvasively from 5,960 participants in the Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. The central pressure waveform was separated into forward and reflected waves using a physiologic flow waveform. Reflection magnitude (RM = [Reflected/Forward wave amplitude] × 100), augmentation index ([Second/First systolic peak] × 100) and pulse pressure amplification ([Radial/aortic pulse pressure] × 100) were assessed as predictors of CVEs and congestive heart failure (CHF) during a median follow-up of 7.61 years. RESULTS: After adjustment for established risk factors, aortic AIx independently predicted hard CVEs (hazard ratio [HR] per 10% increase: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 1.14; p = 0.016), whereas PPA independently predicted all CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.96; p = 0.012). RM was independently predictive of all CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.67; p = 0.009) and hard CVEs (HR per 10% increase: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.90; p = 0.006) and was strongly predictive of new-onset CHF (HR per 10% increase: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.79 to 4.04; p < 0.0001), comparing favorably to other risk factors for CHF as per various measures of model performance, reclassification, and discrimination. In a fully adjusted model, compared to nonhypertensive subjects with low RM, the HRs (95% CI) for hypertensive subjects with low RM, nonhypertensive subjects with high RM, and hypertensive subjects with high RM were 1.81 (0.85 to 3.86), 2.16 (1.07 to 5.01), and 3.98 (1.96 to 8.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Arterial wave reflections represent a novel strong risk factor for CHF in the general population.
Authors: Julio A Chirinos; Juan P Zambrano; Simon Chakko; Anila Veerani; Alan Schob; Howard J Willens; Guido Perez; Armando J Mendez Journal: Hypertension Date: 2005-04-18 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Jan G Kips; Ernst R Rietzschel; Marc L De Buyzere; Berend E Westerhof; Thierry C Gillebert; Luc M Van Bortel; Patrick Segers Journal: Hypertension Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: S Kobayashi; M Yano; M Kohno; M Obayashi; Y Hisamatsu; T Ryoke; T Ohkusa; K Yamakawa; M Matsuzaki Journal: Circulation Date: 1996-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mary J Roman; Richard B Devereux; Jorge R Kizer; Elisa T Lee; James M Galloway; Tauqeer Ali; Jason G Umans; Barbara V Howard Journal: Hypertension Date: 2007-05-07 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Diane E Bild; David A Bluemke; Gregory L Burke; Robert Detrano; Ana V Diez Roux; Aaron R Folsom; Philip Greenland; David R Jacob; Richard Kronmal; Kiang Liu; Jennifer Clark Nelson; Daniel O'Leary; Mohammed F Saad; Steven Shea; Moyses Szklo; Russell P Tracy Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Purnema Madahar; Daniel A Duprez; Anna J Podolanczuk; Elana J Bernstein; Steven M Kawut; Ganesh Raghu; R Graham Barr; Myron D Gross; David R Jacobs; David J Lederer Journal: Respir Med Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 3.415
Authors: Arnaud T Djami-Tchatchou; Gavin R Norton; Andrew Raymond; Hendrik L Booysen; Bryan Hodson; Elena Libhaber; Pinhas Sareli; Angela J Woodiwiss Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Stephen J Ives; Ryan A Harris; Melissa A H Witman; Anette S Fjeldstad; Ryan S Garten; John McDaniel; D Walter Wray; Russell S Richardson Journal: Hypertension Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Scott M Lilly; David R Jacobs; Richard Kronmal; David A Bluemke; Michael Criqui; Joao Lima; Matthew Allison; Daniel Duprez; Patrick Segers; Julio A Chirinos Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Wilmer W Nichols; Scott J Denardo; B Delia Johnson; Barry L Sharaf; C Noel Bairey Merz; Carl J Pepine Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 4.844