Search

Introduction: Aortic stiffness is related to renal function in patients with chronic kidney disease and may contribute to the high cardiovascular mortality in this group. However, the relationship between renal function and arterial haemodynamics in the general population has not previously been reported. Methods: We analysed the relationship between renal function defined by estimated GFR (eGFR) and aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV), brachial PWV (bPWV) and radial and central wave reflections (rAIx and cAIx) for participants enrolled in the Anglo-Cardiff Collaborative Trial between 2000–2009. Results: Measurement of eGFR was available for 4795 participants with a mean age of 48±23 years, 45.5% male, BP 130±20/77±11, mean eGFR 92.7±38.8mL/min. Estimated GFR was correlated with aPWV (rho=−0.53*), bPWV (rho=−0.28*), rAIx (rho=−0.20*) and cAIx (−0.25*) (all P

Background: Aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) is an independent predictor of cardiovascular risk. Phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (PCMRI) is a recent technique that allows PWV to be measured along the entire aorta (aPWVMRI), as well as in regions of interest. The aim of this study was to test the repeatability of PWV assessed by MRI, and to validate this against carotid-femoral PWV using the Vicorder device (PWVVicorder) measured simultaneously to aPWVMRI. Methods: 147 subjects aged 18–85 years were recruited from the ACCT and ENIGMA Studies. All subjects were free of cardiovascular disease and medication. A PCMRI sequence (1.5T scanner, GE) was performed at two sites (1cm above the aortic valve, and 3cm above the aortic bifurcation) to determine aPWVMRI. Brachial supine blood pressure and PWVVicorder were measured in the scanner simultaneous to image acquisition. Repeatability of PWVMRI was assessed across 2 visits, in a subset of 10 subjects. Results: PWVMRI showed good repeatability (mean difference = −0.4±2.1m/s). There was a strong correlation between aPWVMRI and PWVVicorder (R=0.64, P

Central blood pressure may be a better predictor of cardiovascular risk than peripheral blood pressure. The central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) can be estimated from the late systolic shoulder of the radial pulse waveform (pSBP2). We compared pSBP2 with cSBP derived by a generalized transfer function in a large cohort of subjects, across a wide age-range. We also compared pSBP2 with true central SBP (cSBPi) measured by cardiac catheterization. Non-invasive measurements were made by applanation tonometry using the SphygmoCor device. The aortic pressure waveform was derived from the radial waveform using a validated transfer function. cSBPi measurements were carried out in 38 subjects undergoing diagnostic cardiac angiography, and the radial artery pressure waveform was recorded simultaneously using the SphygmoCor device. Data from 1,880 subjects aged 18–85 years, yielded 10,269 individual observations. There was a strong correlation (r=0.99,P

Aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) is an independent predictor of cardiovascular risk. However, PWV is usually determined between the carotid and femoral sites, ignoring the proximal ascending aorta which may stiffen most with age. We tested this hypothesis by assessing regional PWV and aortic diameter along the entire aorta using MRI. 147 healthy subjects aged 18–85 years, free of cardiovascular disease and medication, were recruited from the ACCT Study. A PCMRI sequence (1.5T scanner, GE) was then performed in all subjects at 5 aortic levels: ascending (L1), descending (L2), diaphragm (L3), 3cm above the bifurcation (L5), and mid way between L3 and L5 (L4). Systolic diameter was measured at each level. PWV (PWVMRI) was then determined in 4 aortic regions: the arch (R1), the thoracic-descending (R2), mid-descending (R3) and abdominal (R4). Average PWVMRI values increased from R1 to R4 (4.6±1.5m/s, 5.5±2.0m/s, 5.7±2.3m/s, 6.1±2.9m/s, respectively) and was not different between genders. The greatest age-related increase in PWVMRI occurred in the abdominal aorta (R4) (0.9m/s per decade, P

Background: There is increasing evidence that central (aortic) blood pressure (BP) may be a more important determinant of cardiovascular risk than brachial BP. Most of actual devices to assess central BP non-invasively are partially operator-dependent, or rely on the detection of the late systolic shoulder as an estimation of central systolic BP (cSBP). The Vicorder is a new cuff-based, operator-independent device which obtains brachial BP waveforms using a volume displacement method and derives aortic waveforms using a previously published brachial-to-aortic mathematical transfer function1. Aim: to compare central BP measurements using the Vicorder and SphygmoCor devices. Methods: 27 subjects (38±11 years, 44% males) without cardiovascular diseases were studied after 10minutes of supine rest. Brachial BP was assessed using the Vicorder. Brachial pressure waveforms calibrated to brachial systolic and diastolic pressure were recorded using the Vicorder and radial pressure waveforms calibrated to brachial mean and diastolic pressure were recorded using the SphygmoCor. The corresponding cSBP measurements were compared between devices (vcSBP versus sphygcSBP). Results: The average (±SD) brachial BP was 113±12/63±8 mmHg. There was good agreement between vcSBP (106±12mmHg) and sphygcSBP (105±15mmHg; P=0.56). Similar results were observed for central pulse pressure (cPP), with a mean difference of 1.6 mmHg (P=0.18). Conclusions: the values of cSBP and cPP provided by the Vicorder and SphygmoCor devices show good agreement when radial artery waveforms are calibrated to brachial mean and diastolic pressure. Further comparative data are required in a larger sample size, and with invasive BP measurements.