the proportion of central aortic pulse pressure that is attributed to the reflected pulse wave. We hypothesise that in a cohort of patients, who have one or more cardiac risk factors, and suspected coronary artery disease; arterial stiffness will be elevated compared to a normal population. Methods and results: 910 patients presenting for coronary angiography at Westmead Hospital, Sydney, were recruited into the Australian Heart Eye Study (AHES). Brachial blood pressure was recorded (HEM 907, Omron). Radial arterywaveformsweremeasuredwith a tonometer and pulse wave analysis was used to derive central blood pressures, AP and AIx (SphygmoCor, AtCor Medical). The average values for each decile of age were compared against normal reference ranges derived from 4001 healthy, normotensive individuals (McEniery et al., JACC 2005). The figure shows that while AP is consistent with normal ranges, the AIx is lower than that that of normals, for both genders. mated by two techniques. First, the Pressure Equivalence (PE) technique calibrated brachial waves with brachial cuff pressure values, then the carotid wave was calibrated by assuming identical mean and diastolic pressures, with carotidSPextrapolated. Second, SphygmoCor® technique applied the Transfer Function (TF) to the radial waveform, calibrated to brachial cuff, to generate carotid SP and PP. Amplification was significant between carotid and brachial (8.0mmHg, p< 0.0001) with TF, but not with PE (1.5mmHg, p=NS). PE gave considerable amplification between brachial to radial (8.4mmHg), which was not present with the TF. Form Factors (FF= (mean pressure−diastolic pressure)/PP) for carotid and brachial waves were similar (40.2 c.f. 39.1%; p=NS), but different to the radial (34.5%; p< .0001). Amplification as brachial PP÷ carotid PP using PE was insignificant, but with TF was positive (18%, p< 0.0001). Conclusions:AIx and AP are not significantly increased in a cardiac population, contrary to expectations. doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2011.05.028