Why the study?
Cross-sectional age relations of aortic stiffness measures evaluated in community-based studies are not often recapitulated in longitudinal studies.
Projected longitudinal changes in central hemodynamics extrapolated from cross-sectional data differ substantially from actual longitudinal changes, highlighting the limitations of cross-sectional age relations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Discrepancies caution against using cross-sectional extrapolations for clinical hemodynamic expectations; leaves accurate longitudinal modeling open.
Community-based studies have evaluated cross-sectional age relations of aortic stiffness measures, which are not often recapitulated in longitudinal studies. We examined baseline and longitudinal change in aortic stiffness in 5491 participants (mean age, 49.5±14.5 years; 54% women) who attended 2 sequential examinations (6.0±0.6 years apart) of the Framingham Heart Study. Cross-sectional relations of central hemodynamics (mean arterial pressure, central pulse pressure, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, and characteristic impedance) with age and risk factors were assessed at visits 1 and 2 (models 1 and 2). We used model 1 coefficients (M 1 ), visit 1 risk factor levels (R 1 ), and age at each visit (A 1 , A 2 ) to estimate values at visits 1 (M 1 R 1 A 1 ) and 2 (M 1 R 1 A 2 ). While using model 1 coefficients, we accounted for age and risk factor level (R 2 ) changes to predict values at visit 2 (M 1 R 2 A 2 ). Using model 2 coefficients (M 2 ) and visit 2 age and risk factor levels, we predicted visit 2 values (M 2 R 2 A 2 ). We calculated predicted change 3 ways: delta1=M 1 R 1 A 2 −M 1 R 1 A 1 , delta2=M 1 R 2 A 2 −M 1 R 1 A 1 , and delta3=M 2 R 2 A 2 −M 1 R 1 A 1 . Delta1 values were biased and correlated poorly with actual changes ( r =−0.02–0.14). For mean arterial pressure, delta1=1.9±0.8 mm Hg ( r =0.14), observed change=−3.3±10.3 mm Hg, and discrepancy=5.2±10.2 mm Hg ( P <0.0001). For characteristic impedance, delta1=7.2±14.7 dyne×sec/cm 5 ( r =0.07), observed change=20.5±68.2 dyne×sec/cm 5 , and discrepancy=−13.3±68.7 dyne×sec/cm 5 ( P <0.0001). Delta2 values were moderately correlated with change ( r =0.17–0.54) but remained biased whereas delta3 values were moderately correlated with change with no bias. Projected change in hemodynamic measures extrapolated from cross-sectional age relations may differ substantially from actual change, particularly for variables with nonlinear age relations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cooper et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: