4.7 Article

Aging, Arterial Stiffness, and Blood Pressure Association in Chinese Adults

Journal

HYPERTENSION
Volume 73, Issue 4, Pages 893-899

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12396

Keywords

aging; blood pressure; cardiovascular disease; pulse wave analysis; stroke; vascular stiffness

Funding

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R21NS087235-02]
  2. Penn State University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Arterial stiffness and blood pressure (BP) both increase with aging synchronously. Whether elevated BP results from thickening of arterial wall or vice versa is controversial in previous studies. This study included 17 862 participants without history of myocardial infarction, stroke, atrial fibrillation or flutter, or cancer and with brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) and BP measurements during 2010 to 2016. Age was calculated from the self-reported birthdate to the first date of baPWV examination. Mediation analyses were applied to assess the mediation effect by baPWV in the association between age and BP. Temporal relation between baPWV and BP was assessed by cross-lagged analyses among 1508 participants with repeated assessment of baPWV. We found that systolic BP increased 0.47 (95% CI, 0.45-0.49) mm Hg per 1 year older by the mediation effect of baPWV and that the direct effect of aging on systolic BP was -0.07 (95% CI, -0.09 to -0.05) mm Hg per 1 year older. The standard regression coefficient from baseline baPWV to follow-up systolic BP was 0.09 (95% CI, 0.04-0.15), which was greater than the standard regression coefficient from baseline systolic BP to follow-up baPWV (0.01; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.06). Arterial stiffness mediated the positive association between aging and BP, and arterial stiffness might precede elevated BP. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn. Unique identifier: ChiCTR-TNRC-11001489.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available