Aim. To assess the parameters affecting circumferential strain and local arterial stiffness in carotid arteries in healthy individuals and in patients with cardiovascular risk factors.Methods. We analysed data from 111 adults, aged 20–45 years (38.3 ± 7 years). Of these, 63.06% of men had no known medical history of clinically manifest atherosclerosis. Study participants were categorised into two groups—group I (n = 50) comprising of healthy volunteers without known cardiovascular risk factors and group II (n = 61) consisting of individuals with one of the modifiable risk factors (e.g., smoking, obesity, hypertension or hypercholesterolemia). Patients with diabetes mellitus, cardiac arrhythmias or asymptomatic atherosclerotic plaques in the carotid arteries, even if hemodynamically insignificant, were excluded. The following were measured for the common carotid artery (CCA): circumferential strain (CS, %), strain rate (CSR, s−1), time to peak (TTP) strain (ms), and fraction area change CCA (FAC, %) and local arterial stiffness (β2).Results. CCA mechanics correlated with age, blood pressure, body mass index and left-ventricular myocardial mass index. The lowest CS values were seen in group II patients with hypertension (HTN) (with HTN, 2.4% ± 0.9%, 95% CI = 2.07–2.86; without HTN, 3.6% ± 1.1%, 95% CI = 3.2–4). β2 increased to the greatest extent in patients with HTN (19.3% ± 6.1%, 95% CI = 16–21) as compared to those without HTN (13.5% ± 4.5%, 95% CI =13–16). FAC was inversely correlated with age, both in healthy subjects (Rs = −0.63, p = 0.0001) and in patients with cardiovascular risk factors (Rs = −0.61, p = 0.0001).Conclusion. While CS, strain rate and FAC decreased with age, TTP strain and local arterial stiffness increased. Both mechanics and function of the CCA in patients at risk of developing cardiovascular complications demonstrate a close association with hypertension, obesity, smoking and hypercholesterolemia.Received 19 November 2020. Revised 14 January 2021. Accepted 18 January 2021.Funding: The study did not have sponsorship.Conflict of interest: Authors declare no conflict of interest.Author contributionsConception and study design: Yu.S. Sinelnikov, E.N. Orekhova, T.V. Matanovskaya, E.O. Kopytova, D.O. BaranovaData collection and analysis: E.O. Kopytova, D.O. BaranovaStatistical analysis: E.N. Orekhova, T.V. MatanovskayaDrafting the article: E.N. OrekhovaCritical revision of the article: Yu.S. SinelnikovFinal approval of the version to be published: Yu.S. Sinelnikov, E.N. Orekhova, T.V. Matanovskaya, E.O. Kopytova, D.O. Baranova
Read full abstract