Literature DB >> 33408327

Features and implications of higher systolic central than peripheral blood pressure in patients at very high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Hyungseop Kim1, In-Cheol Kim2, Jongmin Hwang2, Cheol Hyun Lee2, Yun-Kyeong Cho2, Hyoung-Seob Park2, Jin-Wook Chung3, Chang-Wook Nam2, Seongwook Han2, Seung-Ho Hur2.   

Abstract

Peripheral blood pressure (PBP) is usually higher than central blood pressure (CBP) due to pulse amplification; however, it is not well understood why cuff-measured PBP can be lower than CBP estimated by the late systolic pressure of radial pulse waves. We explored the implications of systolic PBP-CBP (P-CBP) differences for cardiovascular (CV) prognosis. In total, 335 patients at very high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) underwent automated applanation tonometry and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV), and they were classified into groups according to positive or negative systolic P-CBP differences. Between-group characteristics and clinical outcomes (the composite of coronary revascularization, stroke, heart failure hospitalization, and CV death) were evaluated. Patients with negative differences had significantly higher frequency of hypertension, coronary artery disease, higher ASCVD risk burden, and elevated N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide. They had higher left atrial volume index (LAVI) and lower systolic mitral septal tissue velocity (TVI-s') than those with a positive difference. These patients showed higher systolic PBP and CBP, and a higher baPWV. Multivariable analysis indicated that TVI-s', LAVI, and ASCVD risk burden were independent determinants of such systolic P-CBP differences. During a median follow-up of 12.6 months, clinical outcomes were significantly related to a negative difference (11.5% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.014), and a systolic P-CBP difference ≤ -8 mmHg was associated with a threefold higher likelihood of poor prognosis. In patients at very high risk of ASCVD, systolic P-CBP difference was associated with cardiac dysfunction and ASCVD risk burden, allowing further risk stratification.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33408327     DOI: 10.1038/s41371-020-00472-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hum Hypertens        ISSN: 0950-9240            Impact factor:   3.012


  3 in total

Review 1.  Left atrium: no longer neglected.

Authors:  Andrea Rossi; Corrado Vassanelli
Journal:  Ital Heart J       Date:  2005-11

2.  2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Scott M Grundy; Neil J Stone; Alison L Bailey; Craig Beam; Kim K Birtcher; Roger S Blumenthal; Lynne T Braun; Sarah de Ferranti; Joseph Faiella-Tommasino; Daniel E Forman; Ronald Goldberg; Paul A Heidenreich; Mark A Hlatky; Daniel W Jones; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Nuria Lopez-Pajares; Chiadi E Ndumele; Carl E Orringer; Carmen A Peralta; Joseph J Saseen; Sidney C Smith; Laurence Sperling; Salim S Virani; Joseph Yeboah
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2018-11-10       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Central systolic blood pressure increases with aortic stiffness.

Authors:  J Bulas; M Potocarova; V Kupcova; L Gaspar; G Wimmer; J Murin
Journal:  Bratisl Lek Listy       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 1.278

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.