Vrachatis D, Papaioannou T G, Konstantopoulou A, Nasothimiou E G, Millasseau S, Blacher J, Safar M E, Sfikakis P P, Stergiou G S, Protogerou A D
1] Hypertension Center and Cardiovascular Research Laboratory, 1st Department of Propaedeutic Medicine, 'Laiko' Hospital Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece [2] Biomedical Engineering Unit, 1st Department of Cardiology, 'Hippokration' Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Biomedical Engineering Unit, 1st Department of Cardiology, 'Hippokration' Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
J Hum Hypertens. 2014 Apr;28(4):236-41. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2013.101. Epub 2013 Oct 24.
Biomarkers derived noninvasively from the aortic blood pressure (BP) waveform provide information regarding cardiovascular (CV) risk independently of brachial BP (bBP). Although body position has significant impact on the assessment of bBP, its effect on aortic hemodynamics remains unknown. This study investigated the changes in both brachial and aortic hemodynamics, between the supine and sitting position. In this randomized cross-over study, the bBP and the aortic pressure waveform were assessed after a 5 min rest (sitting and supine in randomized order); aortic BP, pulse pressure (PP) amplification, augmentation index (AIx) and subendocardial viability index (SEVR) were assessed. Sixty-one subjects were examined (36 males, mean age 50±12 years). Mean BP did not differ between the sitting and supine position (110.8±13.7 vs 110.9±14.9, respectively, P=0.945). However, significant difference between the sitting and supine position in brachial PP (45.9±16.0 vs 52.6±15.6, respectively, P<0.001), aortic PP (36.7±15.2 vs 43.1±13.9, P<0.001), PP amplification (1.28±0.1 vs 1.23±0.1, P<0.001), AIx (26.9±11.9 vs 31.1±10.2, P<0.001) and SEVR (179.6±25.7 vs 161.2±25.8, P<0.001) were found. Review of the literature identified underestimation of the role of body position on aortic hemodynamics. In conclusion, increased PP in both the aorta and brachial artery were found in the supine compared to the sitting position. Reduced PP amplification and SEVR were further observed in the supine position, due to increased pressure wave reflections (AIx).
从主动脉血压(BP)波形无创得出的生物标志物可独立于肱动脉血压(bBP)提供有关心血管(CV)风险的信息。尽管身体姿势对bBP的评估有重大影响,但其对主动脉血流动力学的影响仍不清楚。本研究调查了仰卧位和坐位之间肱动脉和主动脉血流动力学的变化。在这项随机交叉研究中,在5分钟休息后(以随机顺序坐位和仰卧位)评估bBP和主动脉压力波形;评估主动脉BP、脉压(PP)放大、增强指数(AIx)和心内膜下活力指数(SEVR)。检查了61名受试者(36名男性,平均年龄50±12岁)。坐位和仰卧位之间的平均BP无差异(分别为110.8±13.7和110.9±14.9,P = 0.945)。然而,坐位和仰卧位之间在肱动脉PP(分别为45.9±16.0和52.6±15.6,P<0.001)、主动脉PP(36.7±15.2和43.1±13.9,P<0.001)、PP放大(1.28±0.1和1.23±0.1,P<0.001)、AIx(26.9±11.9和31.1±10.2,P<0.001)和SEVR(179.6±25.7和161.2±25.8,P<0.001)方面存在显著差异。文献回顾发现身体姿势对主动脉血流动力学作用的低估。总之,与坐位相比,仰卧位时主动脉和肱动脉的PP均升高。由于压力波反射增加(AIx),仰卧位时进一步观察到PP放大和SEVR降低。