Key result
Aging and atherosclerotic risk factors are linked to progressively lower carotid artery blood velocity.
Why the study?
The effect of age and other atherosclerotic risk factors on carotid artery blood velocity across a wide age range was not well characterized.
Cross-Sectional (n=179)
Carotid artery blood velocity decreases with age, approaching critical levels for thrombogenesis in the very elderly population.
Age-adjusted carotid velocity norms may refine Doppler interpretation in elderly patients; leaves open independent value for atherosclerosis risk stratification.
To evaluate the effect of age and other risk factors for atherosclerosis on arterial blood velocity, carotid arteries in 179 healthy individuals ranging from 21 to 102 years old were examined using color Doppler ultrasonography. Velocity in common and internal carotid arteries decreased consecutively from young adults to very elderly people except for peak internal carotid artery velocity. Peak common carotid artery velocity in the elderly (> or = 65 years old) people was inversely associated with age and diastolic blood pressure and directly associated with pulse pressure. Minimum velocity of common carotid artery was inversely correlated with age and diastolic blood pressure in the elderly people. In elderly group, peak internal carotid artery velocity correlated only with serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Minimum internal carotid artery velocity correlated inversely with systolic blood pressure in adults and diastolic blood pressure in elderly people. Blood velocity in the very elderly population approaches the critical level for thrombogenesis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Homma et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in healthy individuals (n=179). Age and atherosclerotic risk factors was evaluated on carotid artery blood velocity. Age and atherosclerotic risk factors were associated with decreased velocity in common and internal carotid arteries from young adults to very elderly people.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: