Key result
Hypertensive and preeclamptic pregnancies show higher central aortic SBP vs. normotensive controls from mid-gestation.
Why the study?
Central hemodynamic assessment may provide information complementary to brachial blood pressure in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, but its clinical predictive value remained uncertain.
Does central hemodynamic assessment using applanation tonometry differentiate between normotensive pregnancies, uncomplicated hypertensive pregnancies, and hypertensive pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia?
Cohort (n=241)
No
Does central hemodynamic assessment using applanation tonometry differentiate between normotensive pregnancies, uncomplicated hypertensive pregnancies, and hypertensive pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia?
Pregnant women who develop preeclampsia exhibit an altered central hemodynamic phenotype—specifically elevated central aortic systolic blood pressure from 23–26 weeks onward—compared with normotensive and uncomplicated hypertensive pregnancies, though further validation is needed before clinical use.
AoSBP may flag hypertensive disorders earlier in pregnancy; extends complementary central hemodynamics data but leaves clinical adoption open.
Background/Objectives: Central hemodynamic assessment may provide information complementary to brachial blood pressure in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, but its clinical predictive value remains uncertain. This prospective longitudinal study evaluated central aortic systolic blood pressure (AoSBP), augmentation index (AIx), augmentation index normalized to 75 beats/min (AIxHR75), pulse pressure amplification (PPAmpl), and carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) in pregnant women followed at a tertiary outpatient clinic in Poznan, Poland. Methods: Between 2017 and 2023, 241 consecutive pregnant women were examined during pregnancy and postpartum using applanation tonometry (SphygmoCor® PVx). The cohort included 40 normotensive controls, 152 women with hypertension without preeclampsia (HT), and 49 women with hypertension complicated by preeclampsia (HT + PE). Longitudinal profiles were analyzed using prespecified gestational periods, and additional mixed-effects and exploratory ROC analyses were performed in the subgroup with complete observations from 19–22 to 31–34 weeks of gestation. Results: AoSBP was consistently lower in controls than in hypertensive women despite pharmacological control of brachial blood pressure in the hypertensive groups. In the complete-case analysis, AoSBP differentiated the groups most clearly: it was higher in HT than in controls from 19–22 to 31–34 weeks and increased further in HT + PE from 23–26 weeks onward. PPAmpl showed no significant group, period, or interaction effect, whereas AIx and AIxHR75 changed over time but did not show robust between-group differences after Holm correction. Exploratory ROC analyses showed only moderate discrimination for selected parameters and should be considered hypothesis-generating. Conclusions: Women who developed preeclampsia showed an altered central hemodynamic phenotype compared with normotensive pregnancies and uncomplicated hypertensive pregnancies. These findings indicate association and discrimination at the group level, not clinically validated early prediction. External validation and multivariable models including conventional clinical variables and blood pressure measures are required before clinical implementation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szczepaniak‐Chicheł et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preeclampsia (n=241). Hypertension with or without preeclampsia vs. Normotensive pregnancy was evaluated on Central hemodynamic parameters: central aortic systolic blood pressure (AoSBP), augmentation index (AIx), AIx normalized to 75 bpm (AIxHR75), pulse pressure amplification (PPAmpl), and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV). Hypertensive and preeclamptic pregnancies among 241 women showed higher central aortic systolic blood pressure from 19-22 to 31-34 weeks of gestation compared with normotensive controls.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: