4.3 Article

Reflection in the arterial system and the risk of coronary heart disease

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 405-409

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-7061(02)02260-4

关键词

risk factors; inflection time; coronary disease; stenosis; aorta

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although it was reported that the augmentation index and inflection time are closely related to reflection in the arterial system and large artery function, it is not known whether these indices of the ascending aortic pressure waveform increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CHID). The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the aortic reflection of the ascending aortic pressure waveform is related to an increased risk of CHID. Methods: We enrolled 190 men and women who had chest pain, normal contractions, no local asynergy, and no history of myocardial infarction. We measured the ascending aortic pressure using a fluid-filled system. The inflection time was defined as the time interval from initiation of a systolic pressure waveform to the inflection point. We investigated the association between the inflection time and augmentation index of the ascending aorta and the risk of CHD. Results: Both the inflection time and augmentation index were associated with an increased risk of CHID. The crude prevalence rates of CHID were 66.0% for the shortest quartile and 10.6% for the longest quartile of the inflection time, and 17.0% for the lowest quartile and 40.4% for the highest quartile of the augmentation index. The multiple-adjusted odds ratio of CHID was 30.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.43-128.05) for the shortest quartile of the inflection time compared with the longest quartile and was 3.82 (95% CI 1.26-11.59) for the highest quartile of the augmentation index compared with the lowest quartile. Conclusions: The augmentation index and inflection time were associated with an increased risk of CHD. (C) 2002 American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据