Key result
Pulse wave velocity >10.7 m/s predicted impaired coronary flow reserve (CFR <2) with 79% sensitivity and 75% specificity in never-treated hypertensive patients.
Why the study?
Does pulse wave velocity determine coronary flow reserve in never-treated patients with essential hypertension?
Cross-Sectional (n=120)
Does pulse wave velocity determine coronary flow reserve in never-treated patients with essential hypertension?
Effect estimate: r2 change from 0.25 to 0.46
p-value: p=<0.01
Carotid-to-femoral pulse wave velocity provides incremental value beyond standard clinical parameters in identifying impaired coronary microcirculation in never-treated hypertensive patients.
BACKGROUND: Coronary microcirculation is disturbed in essential hypertension. We investigated whether arterial stiffness determines coronary flow reserve (CFR) in hypertensive patients. METHODS: We examined 100 never-treated hypertensives and 20 healthy controls. We measured (i) carotid-to-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV); (ii) Systolic (V (s)) and diastolic (V (d)) coronary flow velocity, time integral (V (TI)-V (d)) of diastolic velocity and CFR after adenosine by transthoracic echocardiography; (iii) ratio of E wave from mitral inflow to Em of mitral annulus, as an index of left ventricular (LV) diastolic pressures using tissue Doppler; (iv) carotid intima-media thickness (IMT), as an index of vascular damage; and (v) 24-h blood pressure parameters using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. RESULTS: Patients had abnormal PWV, IMT, E/Em, resting V (d)/V (s), and CFR than controls (P < 0.05). In hypertensives, PWV was related to abnormal IMT and E/Em which in turn were related to reduced CFR (P < 0.05). PWV and E/Em were independent determinants of CFR and V (d)/V (s) (P < 0.05) in hypertensives. When added to a model including age, sex, smoking, LV mass (LVM), heart rate, 24-h systolic blood pressure (SBP), and E/Em, PWV had an incremental value in the determination of CFR (r (2) change from 0.25 to 0.46, P < 0.01). PWV >10.7 m/s predicted a CFR <2 with 79 and 75% and a CFR <2.6 with 83 and 82% sensitivity and specificity, respectively, using adjusted-receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated LV diastolic compressive forces on coronary microcirculation and the presence of generalized vascular damage may explain the association between PWV and CFR. PWV has an incremental value in the determination of impaired coronary microcirculation in hypertensive patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ikonomidis et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in Essential hypertension (n=120). Pulse wave velocity (PWV) vs. Healthy controls was evaluated on Coronary flow reserve (CFR) (r2 change from 0.25 to 0.46, p=<0.01). Pulse wave velocity >10.7 m/s predicted impaired coronary flow reserve (CFR <2) with 79% sensitivity and 75% specificity in never-treated hypertensive patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: