Abstract

Despite widespread usage of central blood pressure assessment its predictive value among elderly people remains unclear. To ascertain the capacity of central hemodynamic indices for predicting future all-cause and cardiovascular hard outcomes among elderly people. Systematic review and meta-analysis developed at the Del Cuore cardiology clinic, in Antonio Prado, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 312 full-text articles were analyzed, from which 35 studies were included for systematic review. The studies included needed to report at least one central hemodynamic index among patients aged 60 years or over. For all-cause mortality, aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV) and central systolic blood pressure (SBP) were significant, respectively with standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.85 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.69-1.01; I2 96%; P < 0.001); and SMD 0.27 (95% CI 0.15-0.39; I2 77%; P 0.012). For cardiovascular mortality brachial-ankle PWV (baPWV), central SBP and carotid-femoral PWV (cfPWV) were significant, respectively SMD 0.67 (95% CI 0.40-0.93; I2 0%; P 0.610); SMD 0.65 (95% CI 0.48- 0.82; I2 80%; P 0.023); and SMD 0.51 (95% CI 0.32-0.69; I2 85%; P 0.010). The meta-analysis results showed that aPWV was promising for predicting all-cause mortality, while baPWV and central SBP demonstrated consistent results in evaluating cardiovascular mortality outcomes. Thus, the findings support usage of central blood pressure as a risk predictor for hard outcomes among elderly people. RD42018085264.

Highlights

  • Brachial arterial blood pressure is still widely used as a predictive parameter for cardiovascular damage, morbidity and mortality, in assessing cardiovascular risk within clinical practice

  • After multivariate hazard ratio (HR) analysis, the results showed a significant difference between the top decile of brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV) (baPWV) and the whole study population for all-cause mortality outcomes.[35]

  • BaPWV, central systolic blood pressure (SBP) and carotid-femoral PWV (cfPWV) were significant, respectively with standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.67, SMD 0.65 and SMD 0.51 (Figure 4)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Brachial arterial blood pressure is still widely used as a predictive parameter for cardiovascular damage, morbidity and mortality, in assessing cardiovascular risk within clinical practice. This does not correspond to central blood pressure measured through the carotids and ascending aorta.[1,2] Previous studies have demonstrated that central blood pressure measurements are better predictors of vascular disease and cardiovascular events than brachial pressure.[3,4,5]. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis results showed that aPWV was promising for predicting all-cause mortality, while baPWV and central SBP demonstrated consistent results in evaluating cardiovascular mortality outcomes.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call