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
. 2023 Apr 1;41(4):648-657.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003387. Epub 2023 Feb 1.

Relative prognostic importance of aortic and brachial blood pressures for cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in patients with resistant hypertension and diabetes: a two cohorts prospective study

Claudia R L Cardoso  1 , Nathalie C Leite, Gil F Salles
Affiliations

Relative prognostic importance of aortic and brachial blood pressures for cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in patients with resistant hypertension and diabetes: a two cohorts prospective study

Claudia R L Cardoso et al. J Hypertens. .

Abstract

Objective: The prognostic importance of derived central/aortic blood pressures (BPs) in relation to brachial office and ambulatory BPs has never been investigated in patients with resistant hypertension (RHT) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to evaluate it in two cohorts with 532 individuals with RHT and 467 with T2D (median follow-ups 4.4 and 7.3 years, respectively).

Methods: Central/aortic pressure waveforms were estimated by radial tonometry by a type 1 device (SphygmoCor device/software), and other parameters of central hemodynamics (augmentation index and Buckberg indices) were calculated. Multivariate Cox regressions examined the associations between central and peripheral BPs with cardiovascular events incidence and mortality, and C -statistics and the integrated discrimination improvement index evaluated the improvement in risk discrimination.

Results: During follow-up, there were 52 cardiovascular events and 51 all-cause deaths in the RHT and 104 and 137 in the T2D cohort. No aortic BP was better than its brachial counterpart in predicting risk or improving discrimination for any outcome in either cohort. In the RHT cohort, ambulatory BPs were superior to central and office-brachial BPs. Otherwise, the augmentation index in RHT (hazard ratios: 1.5, for 1-SD increment) and the Buckberg index in T2D (hazard ratios: 0.7-0.8) were independent predictors of cardiovascular/mortality outcomes, and improved risk discrimination (integrated discrimination improvement up to 25% in RHT and 15% in T2D).

Conclusion: Derived aortic BPs by a type 1 device did not improve cardiovascular/mortality risk prediction over brachial BPs in our cohorts of patients with RHT and T2D, but additional parameters of central hemodynamics may be useful.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. McEniery CM, Cockcroft JR, Roman MJ, Franklin SS, Wilkinson IB. Central blood pressure: current evidence and clinical importance. Eur Heart J 2014; 35:1719–1725.
    1. Kollias A, Lagou S, Zeniodi ME, Boubouchairopoulou N, Stergiou GS. Association of central versus brachial blood pressure with target-organ damage: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 2016; 67:183–190.
    1. Cheng HM, Chuang SY, Wang TD, Kario K, Buranakitjaroen P, Chia YC, et al. Central blood pressure for the management of hypertension: is it a practical clinical tool in current practice? J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2020; 22:391–406.
    1. Vlachopoulos C, Aznaouridis K, O’Rourke MF, Safar ME, Baou K, Stefanadis C. Prediction of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality with central haemodynamics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2010; 31:1865–1871.
    1. Huang CM, Wang KL, Cheng HM, Chuang SY, Sung SH, Yu WC, et al. Central versus ambulatory blood pressure in the prediction of all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities. J Hypertens 2011; 29:454–459.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources