Search

Systolic hypertension is associated with increased pulse pressure (PP) and increased risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However the pathogenesis of increased PP remains controversial. One hypothesis suggests that aortic dilatation, wall stiffening and increased pulse wave velocity result from elastin fragmentation, leading to a premature reflected pressure wave that contributes to elevated PP. An alternative hypothesis suggests that increased proximal aortic stiffness and reduced aortic diameter leads to mismatch between pressure and flow, giving rise to an increased forward pressure wave and increased PP. To evaluate these two hypotheses, we measured pulsatile hemodynamics and proximal aortic diameter directly using tonometry, ultrasound imaging, and Doppler in 167 individuals with systolic hypertension. Antihypertensive medications were withdrawn for at least 1 week before study. Patients with PP above the median (75 mm Hg) had lower aortic diameter (2.94+/-0.36 versus 3.13+/-0.28 cm, P<0.001) and higher aortic wall stiffness (elastance-wall stiffness product: 16.1+/-0.7 versus 15.7+/-0.7 ln[dyne/cm], P<0.001) with no difference in augmentation index (19.9+/-10.4 versus 17.5+/-10.0%, P=0.12). Aortic diameter and wall stiffness both increased with advancing age (P<0.001). However, an inverse relation between PP and aortic diameter remained significant (P<0.001) in models that adjusted for age, sex, height, and weight and then further adjusted for aortic wall stiffness, augmentation index, and mean arterial pressure. Among individuals with systolic hypertension, increased PP is primarily attributable to increased wall stiffness and reduced aortic diameter rather than premature wave reflection.

Background: Increased aortic stiffness contributes to systolic hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk. The augmentation index (AI), ie, the percentage of central pulse pressure attributed to reflected wave overlap in systole, was proposed as a noninvasive indicator of increased arterial stiffness. We evaluated this hypothesis by investigating relations between AI and other direct measures of aortic stiffness., Methods: Tonometric carotid- and femoral-pressure waveforms, Doppler aortic flow, and aortic-root diameter were assessed in 123 individuals with uncomplicated systolic hypertension and 29 controls of comparable age and sex. Carotid-femoral pulse-wave velocity (PWV) was assessed from the carotid-femoral time delay and body-surface measurements. Aortic PWV was assessed from the ratio of the upstroke of carotid pressure and aortic flow velocity and was used to calculate proximal aortic compliance as [aortic area]/[1.06 x (aortic PWV)(2)]., Results: Partial correlations (adjusted for age, sex, presence of hypertension, height, weight, and systolic ejection period) showed no association between AI and carotid-femoral PWV (R = -0.05, P = .54). The AI was significantly though weakly related directly with aortic compliance (R = 0.21, P = .012) and inversely with aortic PWV (R = -0.198, P = .017). However, higher stiffness (lower compliance and higher PWV) was associated with lower AI., Conclusions: Increased AI is not a reliable surrogate for increased aortic stiffness. Decreasing AI with decreasing compliance (increasing aortic stiffness) may be attributable to impedance matching and reduced wave reflection at the interface between the aorta and the muscular arteries.

Augmentation index (AI), a measure of enhanced wave reflection, has been proposed as a bedside measure of aortic stiffness. However, because AI is potentially sensitive to various factors other than vessel wall stiffness, the utility of AI as a stiffness indicator may be limited. To assess relations between AI and vascular properties, we used arterial tonometry and aortic Doppler flow to evaluate trough (24 hours) and peak (4 hours) pulsatile hemodynamics and pulse wave velocity in 159 individuals with systolic hypertension at the completion of a 12-week period of monotherapy with the vasopeptidase inhibitor omapatrilat (80 mg; n=75) or the converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (40 mg; n=84). Characteristic impedance (Zc) was calculated from the ratio of change in carotid pressure and aortic flow in early systole. Systolic ejection period (SEP), timing of wave reflection, and AI were assessed from the carotid waveform. Comparable acute reductions in mean pressure were associated with greater reductions in peripheral resistance with enalapril, whereas neither drug had an acute effect on Zc. Both drugs reduced AI, but neither drug altered the timing of wave reflection. Both drugs increased heart rate and shortened SEP. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the acute reduction in AI was most affected by reductions in SEP and peripheral resistance. Change in AI was inversely related to change in Zc and pulse wave velocity did not enter the model. Our findings indicate that AI is a complex surrogate marker that is inversely related to changes in proximal aortic stiffness in systolic hypertension.

Abstract: Background: Abnormal large artery function and increased pulsatile load are exacerbated by excess angiotensin-II acting through the AT1 receptor and contribute to the pathogenesis and progression of chronic heart failure (CHF). Aims: To evaluate effects of the AT1 receptor blocker candesartan (N =30) or placebo (N =34) on pulsatile hemodynamics in participants with CHF in the CHARM program. Methods and results: Noninvasive hemodynamics were assessed following 6 and 14 months of treatment and averaged. Using calibrated tonometry and aortic outflow Doppler, characteristic impedance was calculated as the ratio of the change in carotid pressure and aortic flow in early systole. Total arterial compliance was calculated by the diastolic area method. Brachial blood pressure, cardiac output and peripheral resistance did not differ between groups. Lower central pulse pressure in the candesartan group (57±20 vs. 67±17 mmHg, P =0.043) was accompanied by lower characteristic impedance (200±78 vs. 240±74 dyne s/cm5, P =0.039) and higher total arterial compliance (1.87±0.70 vs. 1.47±0.48 ml/mmHg, P =0.008). Similar favorable differences were seen when analyses were stratified for ejection fraction (≤0.40 vs. >0.40) and baseline angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor use. Conclusions: Candesartan has a favorable effect on large artery function in patients with chronic heart failure. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]