[Informativity of Indicators of the Arterial Wall Stiffness for Screening Studies].

OBJECTIVE: comparative assessment of informativity of parameters of arterial wall stiffness - the cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI), the augmentation index (AI) - for solution of problems of screening patients being under threat of realization of complex impact of metabolic syndrome (MS) and elevated vessel wall stiffness, both creators and markers of high risk of severe cardiovascular complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined mining industry employees (n=206) with cardiac risk factors (arterial hypertension, abdominal obesity, and smoking). Comparative group comprised 75 employees of the same enterprise without above-mentioned risk factors. Studies of arterial wall stiffness included determination of CAVI and AI. The sensitivity, specifcity and accuracy of the screening method were calculated. RESULTS: CAVI and AI parameters had different sensitivity, specifcity and accuracy for identifying patients at risk of cardiovascular complications. AI was 2 times more sensitive than CAVI during examination of patients with only clinical and anamnestic cardiovascular risk markers and patients with clinical-anamnestic and laboratory risk markers. Specifcity of AI was lower than specifcity of CAVI and atained only 34.4% in patients with clinical-anamnestic and laboratory risk factors. At the same time, specifcity of CAVI in these patients reached 86.2%. Accuracy of AI for screening study was 1.4 times higher than that of CAVI in patients with only clinical-anamnestic risk markers, and 1.6 times higher in patients with both clinical-anamnestic and laboratory risk markers. Moreover, after comparing patient groups with individually high and normal CAVI and AI, we found the differences in metabolic laboratory risk factors (glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides and the Atherogenic Index) only for AI. CONCLUSION: Parameters of arterial stiffness have different informative value for screening of patients with clinical-anamnestic or laboratory risk factors. AI compared with CAVI is 2 times more sensitive and 1.6 times more accurate but has lower specifcity for risk factor screening among patients being under threat of realization of complex impact of MS and elevated vessel wall stiffness.

[Arterial bed stiffness in patients with different cardiovascular risk factors]. / Zhestkost' arterial'nogo rusla u patsientov s razlichnymi faktorami riska razvitiya serdechno-sosudistykh zabolevanii.

AIM: To investigate the specific features of changes in the arterial wall stiffness (AWS) parameters obtained by sphygmomanometry in patients with different risk factors (RFs) for cardiovascular events (CVEs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 208 mining enterprise workers who had cardiovascular RFs, such as hypertension, abdominal obesity, and smoking, were examined. A comparison group consisted of 75 workers of this enterprise who had no these RFs. AWS was examined using a VaSera VS-1500 (Fukuda Denshi, Japan) to determine CAVI, ABI, UT, %МАР, AI, tb, and tba. RESULTS: The group of patients with a combination of RFs versus the comparison group showed a statistically significant prevalence of virtually all sphygmomanometric indices characterizing AWS, which is suggestive of a less favorable long-term prognosis in this category of patients. CONCLUSION: The patients having abnormal AWS parameters should be included in a group at risk for cardiovascular diseases and CVEs and their existing RFs be further assessed in detail for a preventive purpose. It is appropriate to incorporate volumetric sphygmomanometry in screening examination programs.