Why the study?
Current hypertension guidelines differ across continents regarding the usefulness of assessing large artery stiffness, and recent advances have emerged since the 2015 AHA Scientific Statement.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review updates the 2015 AHA Scientific Statement on arterial stiffness, highlighting the prognostic value of pulse wave velocity and the effects of various interventions on large artery stiffness.
Large artery stiffness (LAS) has proven to be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality. Nevertheless, the position of current hypertension guidelines regarding the usefulness of assessing LAS differs across different continents. In general, European Guidelines recognize pulse wave velocity (PWV) as a marker of target organ damage but do not recommend its systematic use in general population. Asian guidelines consider PWV as a recommended test at diagnosis of hypertension, in contrast to North American guidelines that do not state any position about its usefulness. However, PWV predicts cardiovascular events, and several studies have shown that it improves risk classification adjusting for established risk factors especially for intermediate-risk patients. Finally, some advances have been made related to treatments affecting LAS. Dietary interventions such as sodium restriction and exercise-based interventions have a modest effect in reducing LAS. Pharmacological interventions, such as statins, or more recent advances with mineralocorticoid blocker seem to have a beneficial effect. Last, controversial effects of renal denervation on LAS have been found. Our goal here is to update the reader on LAS on these areas since the 2015 American Heart Association Scientific Statement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rey-García et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: