Why the study?
Although reliable pulse wave velocity estimation methods have been developed, their ability to inform cardiovascular risk prediction beyond current clinical risk tools remains uncertain.
Does algorithm-based pulse wave velocity estimation improve cardiovascular risk prediction beyond standard risk equations in adults aged 40-69?
Does algorithm-based pulse wave velocity estimation improve cardiovascular risk prediction beyond standard risk equations in adults aged 40-69?
Algorithm-based pulse wave velocity estimation improves 10-year cardiovascular risk prediction beyond standard ASCVD and SCORE-2 risk equations.
Algorithm-based ePWV may add prognostic value beyond ASCVD/SCORE-2; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), a marker of arterial stiffness, is a recognized cardiovascular disease risk factor. As measuring PWV is time-consuming, reliable estimation methods have been developed, but their ability to inform cardiovascular risk prediction beyond what is achievable with current clinical risk tools is uncertain. METHODS: This study includes participants aged between 40 and 69 years from the population-based CARTaGENE cohort. PWV estimations (ePWV) were obtained using published formulas (ePWV f ) or algorithmic transformation of pulse waveforms (ePWV algo ) and 10-year cardiovascular risk for each participant was computed using the ASCVD and the SCORE-2 risk equations. Participants were followed during 10 years for major adverse cardiovascular events occurrence (MACE: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke). Associations of ePWV f and ePWV algo with MACE were obtained using Cox models adjusted for ASCVD or SCORE-2 in the overall population and in a subpopulation representative of the ePWV f derivation cohort. RESULTS: Of 17 548 eligible participants, 2263 (12.9%) experienced a MACE during follow-up. Both ePWVf and ePWV algo were associated with MACE in unadjusted analyses, but only ePWV algo remained significant after adjustments for ASCVD [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16 [1.09-1.22]] and SCORE-2 (HR = 1.07 [1.00-1.13]). In contrast, ePWV f was not associated with MACE after adjustment for either risk score, and only after adjustment with ASCVD when it was tested in the subpopulation representative of its derivation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithm-based PWV improved cardiovascular risk prediction beyond what is achievable from recognized risk equations, whereas the predictive ability of ePWV f may not be generalizable outside of its reference population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Desbiens et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: