Large Artery Stiffness According to Different Assessment Methods in Adult Population of St. Petersburg
Atheroscler Suppl. 2018;35, e1-e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosissup.2018.08.001
1) Summarize your work in one sentence.
The aim of the present study was to assess the prevalence of increased arterial stiffness by different diagnostic methods and its association with cardiovascular risk in Russian population-based cohort.
2) Summarize your findings in one sentence.
75,4% had normal parameters of arterial stiffness assessed by all methods, there was a significant correlation between cardiovascular risk defined by SCORE and PWV-S (r = 0,38, p < 0,001) and a non-significant trend of increasing CAVI along with cardiovascular risk (r = 0,35, p = 0,14).
3) Which were the more important methods you used in this work?
We used 3 diagnostic methods of arterial stiffness assessment: pulse wave velocity by applanation tonometry (SphygmoCor PWV-S) and pulse wave velocity by volumetric sphygmography (VaSera PWV-V), and cardio ankle vascular index (CAVI) by VaSera.
4) What did you learn from this paper, what was your take-home message?
Different methods of arterial stiffness assessment showed a weak correlation with each other. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity detected by applanation tonometry is associated with high cardiovascular risk score and might be considered as better additional risk marker for cardiovascular risk stratification.