2010Journal of HypertensionRequires access

AMBULATORY ARTERIAL STIFFNESS INDEX AS A MARKER OF ARTERIAL STIFFNESS: PP.25.06

Tajana Željković Vrkić, Mario Laganović, Ivan Pećin, Duško Kuzmanić, Sandra Karanović, Ivana Vuković Lela, Vedran Premužić, Tomislav Rončević, Lj. Fodor, M. Fistrek, Bojan Jelaković

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective: Increased arterial stiffness (AS) has been shown to predict cardiovascular mortality in patients with essential hypertension (EH). Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) was proposed as a surrogate measurement method for determination of AS. Although, some authors showed prognostic value of AASI, this is still a controversial issue. Our aim was to analyze AASI in 66 normotensive subjects (NT) and 114 patients with EH (divided in stage1 (47), stage 2 (41) and stage 3 (26)). Design and Methods: Detailed clinical exam was performed in all patients. Blood pressure (BP) was measured using mercury sphygmomanometer (RR) and ambulatory blood pressure monitor (ABPM) Spacelabs 90207 following the ESH/ESC guidelines. AASI was defined as 1 minus the regression slope of diastolic over systolic BP values obtained from ABPM. Results: NT were the youngest and had the lowest values of BMI (p < 0.01). There were no differences in age, gender and BMI between hypertensive patients divided into the different stages (p>0.05). The highest values of AASI were determined in stage 1 (0.392 ± 0.054) and NT (0.386 ± 0.036) being significantly different from results obtained in stage 2 and 3 (0.369 ± 0.042; 0.362 ± 0.048, respectively; p = 0.01). Significant differences were observed between NT, stage1, 2 and 3 in pulse pressure values (PP) obtained using either RR (41.6 ± 7.9 vs. 46.2 ± 8.5 vs.51.6 ± 12.3 vs.55.1 ± 13.8, respectively; p < 0.0001) or ABPM (44.5 ± 6.0 vs.49.1 ± 8.9 vs.48.5 ± 6.5 vs.54.0 ± 9.8, respectively; p = 0.0002). Conclusion: The highest AASI values were obtained in the youngest and in subjects with lowest values of BP (NT and stage 1). On contrary, PP values gradually and significantly increased from the NT to the stage 3 group. Obtained AASI values in all groups were below the proposed cut-off values of 0.5 and 0.7 for younger and older, respectively. Our results did not confirm important clinical value of AASI, and PP provide more useful data. Definitive validation of AASI should await further studies with direct measurements of AS.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective: Increased arterial stiffness (AS) has been shown to predict cardiovascular mortality in patients with essential hypertension (EH). Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) was proposed as a surrogate measurement method for determination of AS. Although, some authors showed prognostic value of AASI, this is still a controversial issue. Our aim was to analyze AASI in 66 normotensive subjects (NT) and 114 patients with EH (divided in stage1 (47), stage 2 (41) and stage 3 (26)). Design and Methods: Detailed clinical exam was performed in all patients. Blood pressure (BP) was measured using mercury sphygmomanometer (RR) and ambulatory blood pressure monitor (ABPM) Spacelabs 90207 following the ESH/ESC guidelines. AASI was defined as 1 minus the regression slope of diastolic over systolic BP values obtained from ABPM. Results: NT were the youngest and had the lowest values of BMI (p < 0.01). There were no differences in age, gender and BMI between hypertensive patients divided into the different stages (p>0.05). The highest values of AASI were determined in stage 1 (0.392 ± 0.054) and NT (0.386 ± 0.036) being significantly different from results obtained in stage 2 and 3 (0.369 ± 0.042; 0.362 ± 0.048, respectively; p = 0.01). Significant differences were observed between NT, stage1, 2 and 3 in pulse pressure values (PP) obtained using either RR (41.6 ± 7.9 vs. 46.2 ± 8.5 vs.51.6 ± 12.3 vs.55.1 ± 13.8, respectively; p < 0.0001) or ABPM (44.5 ± 6.0 vs.49.1 ± 8.9 vs.48.5 ± 6.5 vs.54.0 ± 9.8, respectively; p = 0.0002). Conclusion: The highest AASI values were obtained in the youngest and in subjects with lowest values of BP (NT and stage 1). On contrary, PP values gradually and significantly increased from the NT to the stage 3 group. Obtained AASI values in all groups were below the proposed cut-off values of 0.5 and 0.7 for younger and older, respectively. Our results did not confirm important clinical value of AASI, and PP provide more useful data. Definitive validation of AASI should await further studies with direct measurements of AS.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective: Increased arterial stiffness (AS) has been shown to predict cardiovascular mortality in patients with essential hypertension (EH). Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) was proposed as a surrogate measurement method for determination of AS. Although, some authors showed prognostic value of AASI, this is still a controversial issue. Our aim was to analyze AASI in 66 normotensive subjects (NT) and 114 patients with EH (divided in stage1 (47), stage 2 (41) and stage 3 (26)). Design and Methods: Detailed clinical exam was performed in all patients. Blood pressure (BP) was measured using mercury sphygmomanometer (RR) and ambulatory blood pressure monitor (ABPM) Spacelabs 90207 following the ESH/ESC guidelines. AASI was defined as 1 minus the regression slope of diastolic over systolic BP values obtained from ABPM. Results: NT were the youngest and had the lowest values of BMI (p < 0.01). There were no differences in age, gender and BMI between hypertensive patients divided into the different stages (p>0.05). The highest values of AASI were determined in stage 1 (0.392 ± 0.054) and NT (0.386 ± 0.036) being significantly different from results obtained in stage 2 and 3 (0.369 ± 0.042; 0.362 ± 0.048, respectively; p = 0.01). Significant differences were observed between NT, stage1, 2 and 3 in pulse pressure values (PP) obtained using either RR (41.6 ± 7.9 vs. 46.2 ± 8.5 vs.51.6 ± 12.3 vs.55.1 ± 13.8, respectively; p < 0.0001) or ABPM (44.5 ± 6.0 vs.49.1 ± 8.9 vs.48.5 ± 6.5 vs.54.0 ± 9.8, respectively; p = 0.0002). Conclusion: The highest AASI values were obtained in the youngest and in subjects with lowest values of BP (NT and stage 1). On contrary, PP values gradually and significantly increased from the NT to the stage 3 group. Obtained AASI values in all groups were below the proposed cut-off values of 0.5 and 0.7 for younger and older, respectively. Our results did not confirm important clinical value of AASI, and PP provide more useful data. Definitive validation of AASI should await further studies with direct measurements of AS.

Key concepts: Arterial stiffness, Medicine, Ambulatory blood pressure, Cardiology, Ambulatory, Internal medicine, Blood pressure, Pulse pressure

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
AMBULATORY ARTERIAL STIFFNESS INDEX AS A MARKER OF ARTERIAL STIFFNESS: PP.25.06 — Research Paper | ScholarLens