Systemic Arterial Stiffness in New Diagnosed Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Patients.

OBJECTIVE: We suggested: 1) patients with idiopathic pulmonary hypertension (IPAH) have active factors which could damage not only the pulmonary but systemic arteries too as in arterial hypertensive patients; 2) if these changes were present, they might correlate with other parameters influencing on the prognosis. This study is the first attempt to use cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) for the evaluation of systemic arterial stiffness in patients with IPAH. METHODS: A total of 112 patients were included in the study: group 1 consisted of 45 patients with new diagnosed IPAH, group 2 included 32 patients with arterial hypertension, and in the control group were 35 healthy persons adjusted by age. Right heart catheterization, ECG, a 6-minute walk test (6MWT), echocardiography, blood pressure (BP) measurement and ambulatory BP monitoring, pulse wave elastic artery stiffness (PWVe; segment carotid-femoral arteries) and muscular artery stiffness (PWVm; segment carotid-radial arteries), CAVI, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level were provided. The Spearman correlation, a linear regression and multivariable binary logistic analysis were performed to indicate the predictors associated with PWV and CAVI. RESULTS: The groups were adjusted for principal characteristics influenced on arterial stiffness. IPAH patients had significantly (P<0.001 for all) shorter 6MWT distance and higher Borg dyspnea score than the patients with arterial hypertension (systolic/diastolic BP = 146.1±10.7/94.2±9.8 mmHg) and the control group = 330.2±14.6 vs 523.8±35.3 and 560.9±30.2 m respectively and 6.2±1.8 vs 1.2±2.1 and 0.9±2.8 points. The PWVm and PWVe were the highest in hypertensive patients (10.3±1.5 and 11.42±1.70 m/s). The control group and IPAH did not have significant differences in aorta BP, but PWVm/PWVe values were significantly (P<0.003/0.008) higher in IPAH patients than in the control group (8.1±1.9/8.49±1.92 vs 6.63±1.34/7.29±0.87 m/s). The CAVIs on both sides were significantly lower in the healthy subjects (5.91±0.99/5.98±0.87 right/left side). Patients with IPAH did not differ from the arterial hypertension patients by CAVIs in comparison with the control group (7.40±1.32/7.22±1.32 vs 7.19±0.78/7.2±1.1 PWVe) did not correlate with any parameters except uric acid. PWVm correlated with uric acid (r=0.58, P<0.001), NT-proBNP (r=0.33, P=0.03) and male gender (r=0.37, P=0.013) at Spearman analysis, but not at multifactorial linear regression analysis. The CAVI correlated with age and parameters characterized functional capacity (6MWT distance) and right ventricle function (NT-proBNP, TAPSE) at Spearman analysis and with age and TAPSE at multifactorial linear regression analysis. At binary logistic regression analysis CAVI > 8.0 at right and/or left side had a correlation with age, 6MWT distance, TAPSE, but an independent correlation was only with age (ß=1.104, P=0.008, CI 1.026-1.189) and TAPSE (ß=0.66, P=0.016, CI 0.474-0.925). CONCLUSION: In spite of equal and at normal range BP level, the age-adjusted patients with IPAH had significantly stiffer arteries than the healthy persons and they were comparable with the arterial hypertensive patients. Arterial stiffness evaluated by CAVI correlated with age and TAPSE in IPAH patients. Based on our results it is impossible to conclude the pathogenesis of arterial stiffening in IPAH patients, but the discovered changes and correlations suggest new directions for further studies, including pathogenesis and prognosis researches.

Predictors of high central blood pressure in young with isolated systolic hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: According to the European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension 2013 guidelines, evaluation of aortic blood pressure (BP) is needed in young with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH), but using special devices is not common, especially in Ukraine, where only a few centers have these devices. The purpose of our study was to identify the simple clinical predictors for differentiation (with or without elevated aortic systolic BP [SBP]) of the young with ISH without the need for further extensive work-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 44 young men (mean age: 32.2±1.3 years) with office SBP ≥140 mmHg and office diastolic BP (DBP) <90 mmHg (average: 153.4±2.1 mmHg and 83.4±1.7 mmHg, respectively). The following procedures were performed in all the subjects: body weight and height evaluation; measurement of office SBP, DBP, and heart rate; ambulatory BP monitoring; measurement of pulse wave velocity in arteries of elastic and muscle types and central SBP (cSBP); biochemical blood tests; electrocardiography; echocardiography; and carotid ultrasound investigations. Step-by-step multifactor regression analyses were used for finding the predictors of high cSBP. RESULTS: Depending on the cSBP level, all the patients were divided into two groups: first group (n=17), subjects with normal cSBP, and second group (n=27), subjects with elevated cSBP. Patients in the second group were significantly older, with less height and higher body mass index; they had significantly higher levels of office SBP and DBP. Characteristics of target organ damage were within normal limits in both groups and did not differ significantly. Only pulse wave velocity in arteries of elastic type was significantly higher in the second group. The independent predictors of increased cSBP were as follows: height ≤178 cm (ß=7.038; P=0.05), body weight ≥91 kg (ß=5.53, P=0.033), and the level of office DBP ≥80 mmHg (ß=4.43; P=0.05). The presence of two or three of these factors increased the probability of high cSBP in more than ten times (ß=10.6, P=0.001). The sensitivity and specificity were 92.6% and 88.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Thus, 38.6% of young with ISH had normal cSBP. Independent predictors of increased cSBP included height ≤178 cm, weight ≥91 kg, and the level of office DBP ≥80 mmHg. The presence of at least two of these factors indicated the need for starting the antihypertensive therapy in young with ISH. The presence of only one of these factors or none indicated the need for providing the central BP measurements in order to choose the further management strategy.

Comparative effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination of losartan + HCTZ versus bisoprolol + HCTZ in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension: results of the 6-month ELIZA trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of losartan 100 mg + hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg versus bisoprolol 10 mg + HCTZ 25 mg and their influence on arterial stiffness and central blood pressure (BP). METHODS: Of 60 patients with a mean BP of 173.3 ± 1.7/98.4 ± 1.2 mmHg, 59 were randomized to losartan + HCTZ (n = 32) or bisoprolol + HCTZ (n = 27). Amlodipine was added if target BP was not achieved at 1 month, and doxazosin was added if target BP was not achieved after 3 months. Body mass index, office and 24-hour ambulatory BP, pulse wave velocity (carotid-femoral [PWVE] and radial [PWVM]), noninvasive central systolic BP, augmentation index (AIx), laboratory investigations, and electrocardiography were done at baseline and after 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: Losartan + HCTZ was as effective as bisoprolol + HCTZ, with target office BP achieved in 96.9% and 92.6% of patients and target 24-hour BP in 75% and 66.7% of patients, respectively, after 6 months. Effective treatment of BP led to significant lowering of central systolic BP, but this was decreased to a significantly (P < 0.05) greater extent by losartan + HCTZ (-23.0 ± 2.3 mmHg) than by bisoprolol + HCTZ (-15.4 ± 2.9 mmHg) despite equal lowering of brachial BP. Factors correlated with central systolic BP and its lowering differed between the treatment groups. Losartan + HCTZ did not alter arterial stiffness patterns significantly, but bisoprolol + HCTZ significantly increased AIx. We noted differences in ΔPWVE, ΔPWVM, and ΔAIx between the groups in favor of losartan + HCTZ. Decreased heart rate was associated with higher central systolic BP and AIx in the bisoprolol + HCTZ group, but was not associated with increased AIx in the losartan + HCTZ group. CONCLUSION: Although both treatments decreased both office and 24-hour BP, losartan + HCTZ significantly decreased central systolic BP and had a more positive influence on pulse wave velocity, with a less negative effect of decreased heart rate on AIx and central systolic BP.