Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Mar 9;55(10):1032-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.09.061.

Pulse pressure amplification a mechanical biomarker of cardiovascular risk

Affiliations
Free article

Pulse pressure amplification a mechanical biomarker of cardiovascular risk

Athanase Benetos et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. .
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether the carotid/brachial (C/B) ratio is an independent predictor of cardiovascular (CV) risk.

Background: Brachial and carotid pulse pressure (PP) are independent predictors of CV risk, mainly in elderly patients. Because PP is physiologically lower at the brachial than at the carotid arterial site, PP amplification is represented by the C/B ratio and could independently predict CV risk.

Methods: In a Paris population (n = 834), brachial and carotid PP were measured from sphygmomanometry and pulse wave analysis. With stepwise multiple regression, carotid PP was calculated from a nomogram including age, sex, body height, brachial PP, and plasma glucose. This model was applied to 125,151 subjects, followed for 12 years, during which 3,997 deaths occurred (735 of CV origin). With Cox regression analysis, multi-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for 1 SD increase of brachial PP, calculated carotid PP, and C/B ratio.

Results: Brachial PP was significantly associated with both CV and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13 to 1.19, and HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.17, respectively). Calculated carotid PP predicted a similar risk (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.28, and HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.25, respectively). Finally, the C/B ratio was a strong risk predictor (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.32, and HR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.73, respectively). Addition of drug treatment and other confounding variables did not statistically modify the results.

Conclusions: Brachial PP, calculated carotid PP, and C/B PP amplification all predict CV mortality. In contrast to brachial and carotid PP, the C/B ratio is less dependent on blood pressure calibration and thus can be directly applicable to large population studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources