Parragh Stephanie, Hametner Bernhard, Bachler Martin, Kellermair Jörg, Eber Bernd, Wassertheurer Siegfried, Weber Thomas
AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, Health & Environment Department, Biomedical Systems, Donau-City-Str. 1, 1220 Vienna, Austria; Vienna University of Technology, Institute of Analysis and Scientific Computing, Wiedner Hauptstr. 8-10, 1040 Vienna, Austria.
AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, Health & Environment Department, Biomedical Systems, Donau-City-Str. 1, 1220 Vienna, Austria.
Int J Cardiol. 2015;190:308-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.04.183. Epub 2015 Apr 23.
In general, higher blood pressure levels and increased central pulsatility are indicators for increased cardiovascular risk. However, in systolic heart failure (SHF), this relationship is reversed. Therefore, the aim of this work is to compare pulsatile hemodynamics between patients with SHF and controls and to clarify the relationships between measures of cardiac and arterial function in the two groups.
We used parameters derived from angiography, echocardiography, as well as from pulse wave analysis (PWA) and wave separation analysis (WSA) based on non-invasively assessed pressure and flow waves to quantify cardiac function, aortic stiffness and arterial wave reflection in 61 patients with highly reduced (rEF) and 122 matched control-patients with normal ejection fraction (nEF).
Invasively measured pulse wave velocity was comparable between the groups (8.6/8.05 m/s rEF/nEF, P = 0.24), whereas all measures derived by PWA and WSA were significantly decreased (augmentation index: 18.1/24.8 rEF/nEF, P < 0.01; reflection magnitude: 56.3/62.1 rEF/nEF, P < 0.01). However, these differences could be explained by the shortened ejection duration (ED) in rEF (ED: 269/308 ms rEF/nEF, P < 0.01; AIx: 22.2/22.8 rEF/nEF, P = 0.7; RM: 59.3/60.6 rEF/nEF, P = 0.47 after adjustment for ED). Ventricular function was positively associated with central pulse pressures in SHF in contrast to no or even a slightly negative association in controls.
The results suggest that the decreased measures of pulsatile function may be caused by impaired systolic function and altered interplay of left ventricle and vascular system rather than by a real reduction of wave reflections or aortic stiffness in SHF.
一般而言,较高的血压水平和增加的中心脉搏搏动性是心血管风险增加的指标。然而,在收缩性心力衰竭(SHF)中,这种关系是相反的。因此,本研究的目的是比较SHF患者与对照组之间的搏动血流动力学,并阐明两组中心脏和动脉功能指标之间的关系。
我们使用了来自血管造影、超声心动图以及基于无创评估的压力和血流波的脉搏波分析(PWA)和波分离分析(WSA)得出的参数,以量化61例射血分数极低(rEF)的患者和122例匹配的射血分数正常(nEF)的对照患者的心脏功能、主动脉僵硬度和动脉波反射。
两组之间有创测量的脉搏波速度相当(rEF/nEF为8.6/8.05 m/s,P = 0.24),而PWA和WSA得出的所有测量值均显著降低(增强指数:rEF/nEF为18.1/24.8,P < 0.01;反射幅度:rEF/nEF为56.3/62.1,P < 0.01)。然而,这些差异可以通过rEF中射血持续时间(ED)缩短来解释(ED:rEF/nEF为269/308 ms,P < 0.01;调整ED后,AIx:rEF/nEF为22.2/22.8,P = 0.7;RM:rEF/nEF为59.3/60.6,P = 0.47)。与对照组无关联或甚至有轻微负关联相反,SHF患者的心室功能与中心脉压呈正相关。
结果表明,搏动功能测量值降低可能是由于收缩功能受损以及左心室与血管系统之间相互作用改变所致,而非SHF中波反射或主动脉僵硬度真正降低。