| Literature DB >> 29324585 |
Jirar Topouchian1, Carlos Labat2, Sylvie Gautier3, Magnus Bäck2,4, Apostolos Achimastos5, Jacques Blacher1, Marcin Cwynar6, Alejandro de la Sierra7, Denes Pall8, Francesco Fantin9, Katalin Farkas10, Luis Garcia-Ortiz11,12, Zoya Hakobyan13, Piotr Jankowski14, Ana Jelakovic15, Zhanna Kobalava16, Alexandra Konradi17, Yulia Kotovskaya18,19,20, Marina Kotsani3, Irina Lazareva21, Alexander Litvin22, Viktor Milyagin23, Iveta Mintale24, Oscar Persson4, Rafael Ramos25,26,27, Anatoly Rogoza22, Ligita Ryliskyte28, Angelo Scuteri29, Yuriy Sirenko30, Georges Soulis31, Nebojsa Tasic32, Maryna Udovychenko33, Saule Urazalina34, Peter Wohlfahrt35, Parounak Zelveian13, Athanase Benetos2,3, Roland Asmar36.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the Advanced Approach to Arterial Stiffness study was to compare arterial stiffness measured simultaneously with two different methods in different age groups of middle-aged and older adults with or without metabolic syndrome (MetS). The specific effects of the different MetS components on arterial stiffness were also studied.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29324585 PMCID: PMC5862002 DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hypertens ISSN: 0263-6352 Impact factor: 4.844
Baseline characteristics of the study population
| All | MetS-no | MetS-yes | |
| Number | 2224 | 560 | 1664 |
| Age (years) | 60 ± 11 | 57 ± 11 | 61 ± 11 |
| Women (%) | 53% | 54% | 52% |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 101 ± 13 | 91 ± 12 | 104 ± 12 |
| Glycaemia (mg/dl) | 108 ± 34 | 93 ± 19 | 114 ± 36 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | 56 ± 26 | 62 ± 18 | 54 ± 28 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 144 ± 82 | 101 ± 43 | 159 ± 87 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 140 ± 18 | 135 ± 17 | 142 ± 18 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 85 ± 11 | 83 ± 11 | 85 ± 11 |
| PP (mmHg) | 55 ± 14 | 52 ± 13 | 56 ± 14 |
| HR (b/min) | 69 ± 11 | 68 ± 11 | 69 ± 11 |
| Antidiabetic med. | 20% | 2% | 26% |
| Hypolipidaemic med. | 49% | 3% | 65% |
| Antihypertensive med. | 75% | 45% | 85% |
| Antihypert. drugs (number) | 1.68 ± 1.32 | 0.77 ± 1.05 | 1.99 ± 1.26 |
| Family history CVD | 40% | 38% | 40% |
| Obesity | 50% | 22% | 59% |
| Hypertension | 81% | 60% | 89% |
| Dyslipidaemia | 74% | 42% | 85% |
| Diabetes | 25% | 5% | 32% |
| Stroke | 3.5% | 2.1% | 3.9% |
| Myocardial infarction | 7.6% | 2.0% | 9.5% |
| Angina | 13% | 4% | 16% |
| Heart failure | 9.2% | 2.9% | 11.4% |
| Renal Failure | 5.4% | 2.9% | 6.3% |
| CF-PWV (m/s) | 9.33 ± 2.51 | 8.42 ± 2.09 | 9.65 ± 2.57 |
| CAVI (arbitrary units) | 8.32 ± 1.34 | 8.06 ± 1.36 | 8.41 ± 1.32 |
MetS-no, absence of metabolic syndrome; MetS-yes, presence of metabolic syndrome. Comparison between MetS-no and MetS-yes. CAVI, cardiac-ankle vascular index; CF-PWV, carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HR, heart rate; PP, pulse pressure; WC, waist circumference.
*P < 0.001.
**P < 0.05.
***P < 0.01.
FIGURE 1Evolution of pulse wave velocity and cardio-ankle vascular index values with age.
FIGURE 2Effects of metabolic syndrome and sex-adjusted on age-adjusted pulse wave velocity and cardio-ankle vascular index values.
FIGURE 3Effects of metabolic syndrome on sex-adjusted pulse wave velocity and cardio-ankle vascular index values according to age groups.
FIGURE 4Effects of each metabolic syndrome component on sex-adjusted and age-adjusted pulse wave velocity (a) and cardio-ankle vascular index (b) values.
Multivariate analysis in explaining pulse wave velocity and cardio-ankle vascular index variations according to age, sex and each of the five metabolic syndrome components
| PWV | Reg Coeff ± SEM | ||
| Age (years) | 11.2 | 0.076 ± 0.005 | <0.0001 |
| Women | 0.2 | −0.19 ± 0.11 | 0.09 |
| BP (yes) | 1.0 | 0.81 ± 0.19 | <0.0001 |
| Glu (yes) | 1.4 | 0.57 ± 0.11 | <0.0001 |
| HDL (yes) | 0.7 | 0.42 ± 0.12 | 0.0003 |
| WC (yes) | – | – | 0.22 |
| TG (yes) | – | – | 0.29 |
| Model | 13.7 |
Yes means presence of this MetS component. BP, blood pressure; Glu, glucose; MetS, metabolic syndrome; Reg Coeff, regression coefficient; TG, triglycerides; WC, waist circumference.
FIGURE 5Effects of the waist circumference on cardio-ankle vascular index values according to sex and age groups.
FIGURE 6Relationship between age-adjusted and sex-adjusted pulse wave velocity values vs. cardio-ankle vascular index values.