In recent years, great emphasis has been placed on the role of arterial stiffness in the development of cardiovascular diseases. Indeed, the assessment of arterial stiffness is increasingly used in the clinical assessment of patients. Although several papers have previously addressed the methodological issues concerning the various indices of arterial stiffness currently available, and their clinical applications, clinicians and researchers still report difficulties in selecting the most appropriate methodology for their specific use. This paper summarizes the proceedings of several meetings of the European Network for Non-invasive Investigation of Large Arteries and is aimed at providing an updated and practical overview of the most relevant methodological aspects and clinical applications in this area.

Expert consensus document on arterial stiffness: methodological issues and clinical applications

Expert consensus document on arterial stiffness : methodological issues and clinical applications. Commentary

Although various studies reported that pulse pressure, an indirect index of arterial stiffening, was an independent risk factor for mortality, a direct relationship between arterial stiffness and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality remained to be established in patients with essential hypertension. A cohort of 1980 essential hypertensive patients who attended the outpatient hypertension clinic of Broussais Hospital between 1980 and 1996 and who had a measurement of arterial stiffness was studied. At entry, aortic stiffness was assessed from the measurement of carotid-femoral pulse-wave velocity (PWV). A logistic regression model was used to estimate the relative risk of all-cause and cardiovascular deaths. Selection of classic risk factors for adjustment of PWV was based on their influence on mortality in this cohort in univariate analysis. Mean age at entry was 50+/-13 years (mean+/-SD). During an average follow-up of 112+/-53 months, 107 fatal events occurred. Among them, 46 were of cardiovascular origin. PWV was significantly associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a univariate model of logistic regression analysis (odds ratio for 5 m/s PWV was 2.14 [95% confidence interval, 1.71 to 2.67, P<0.0001] and 2.35 [95% confidence interval, 1.76 to 3.14, P<0.0001], respectively). In multivariate models of logistic regression analysis, PWV was significantly associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, independent of previous cardiovascular diseases, age, and diabetes. By contrast, pulse pressure was not significantly and independently associated to mortality. This study provides the first direct evidence that aortic stiffness is an independent predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with essential hypertension.

/pdf/aortic-stiffness-is-an-independent-predictor-of-all-cause-fnx5oj5jru.pdf

Aortic stiffness is an independent predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in hypertensive patients.

The Rotterdam study

Background—Damage to large arteries is a major factor in the high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Increased arterial stiffness and intima-med...

Impact of Aortic Stiffness on Survival in End-Stage Renal Disease

Pulse wave velocity is widely used as an index of arterial distensibility. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new automatic device to measure it and then to analyze the major determinants of pulse wave velocity by application of this device in a large population. We evaluated the accuracy of on-line and computerized measurement of pulse wave velocity using an algorithm based on the time-shifted and repeated linear correlation calculation between the initial rise in pressure waveforms compared with the reference method (manual calculation) in 56 subjects. The results, analyzed according to the recommendations of Bland and Altman, showed a mean difference of -0.20 +/- 0.45 m/s for the mean carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity values (reference method, 11.05 +/- 2.58 m/s; automatic device, 10.85 +/- 2.44 m/s). The interreproducibility and intrareproducibility of measurements by each method were analyzed with the use of the repeatability coefficient according to the British Standards Institution. The interobserver repeatability coefficient was 0.947 for the manual method and 0.890 for the automatic, and intraobserver repeatability coefficients were 0.938 and 0.935, respectively. We evaluated the major determinants of the carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity measured by the automatic method in a separate study performed in 418 subjects of both sexes without any cardiovascular treatment or complication (18 to 77 years of age; 98 to 222 mm Hg systolic and 62 to 130 mm Hg diastolic pressure).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Assessment of Arterial Distensibility by Automatic Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement: Validation and Clinical Application Studies

http://www.cmcv.org/upload/publication/Reference-values-for-clinic-pulse-pressure-Am-J-Hypertens-2001.pdf

Anne-Marie Brisac

Papers

Assessment of Arterial Distensibility by Automatic Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement: Validation and Clinical Application Studies

Reference values for clinic pulse pressure in a nonselected population.