Key result
Higher proximal aortic stiffness on CMR is linked to worse LV diastolic function.
Why the study?
Stiffness of the proximal aorta may contribute to adverse LV-vascular interactions and LV diastolic dysfunction, but its relation to clinical measures of LV diastolic mechanics required study in the community.
Is higher proximal aortic stiffness associated with worse left ventricular diastolic function in community-dwelling older adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=1,502)
Blinded imaging analysis
No
Is higher proximal aortic stiffness associated with worse left ventricular diastolic function in community-dwelling older adults?
Effect estimate: β=-0.10
p-value: p=0.001
Demonstrates that higher proximal aortic stiffness correlates with worsening LV diastolic mechanics in older adults, shedding light on vascular-ventricular interactions.
Higher aortic stiffness was associated with worse LV diastolic function; hypothesis-generating for vascular-ventricular coupling but should not yet change practice.
Background Stiffness of the proximal aorta may play a critical role in adverse left ventricular (LV)–vascular interactions and associated LV diastolic dysfunction. In a community‐based sample, we sought to determine the association between proximal aortic stiffness measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and several clinical measures of LV diastolic mechanics. Methods and Results Framingham Heart Study Offspring adults (n=1502 participants, mean 67±9 years, 54% women) with available 1.5T CMR and transthoracic echocardiographic measures were included. Measures included proximal descending aortic strain and aortic arch pulse wave velocity by CMR (2002–2006) and diastolic function (mitral Doppler E and A wave velocity, E wave area, and LV tissue Doppler e' velocity) by echocardiography (2005–2008). Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to relate CMR aortic stiffness measures to measures of echocardiographic LV diastolic function. All continuous variables were standardized. In multivariable‐adjusted regression analyses, aortic strain was inversely associated with E wave deceleration time (estimated β=−0.10±0.032, P =0.001), whereas aortic arch pulse wave velocity was inversely associated with E/A ratio (estimated β=−0.094±0.027, P =0.0006), E wave area (estimated β=−0.070±0.027, P =0.010), and e' (estimated β=−0.061±0.027, P =0.022), all indicating associations of higher aortic stiffness by CMR with less favorable LV diastolic function. Compared with men, women had a larger inverse relationship between pulse wave velocity and E/A ratio (interaction β=−0.085±0.031, P =0.0064). There was no significant effect modification by age or a U‐shaped (quadratic) relation between aortic stiffness and LV diastolic function measures. Conclusions Higher proximal aortic stiffness is associated with less favorable LV diastolic function. Future studies may clarify temporal relations of aortic stiffness with varying patterns and progression of LV diastolic dysfunction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Spetko et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Community-dwelling adults (n=1,502). Higher proximal aortic stiffness (measured by CMR aortic strain and pulse wave velocity) vs. Lower proximal aortic stiffness was evaluated on Echocardiographic left ventricular diastolic function (E wave deceleration time) (β=-0.10, p=0.001). Higher proximal aortic stiffness measured by CMR was significantly associated with less favorable echocardiographic left ventricular diastolic function, including a prolonged E wave deceleration time and reduced E/A ratio.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: