Determinants and covariates of central pressures and wave reflections in systolic heart failure. (1st July 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Parragh, Stephanie; Hametner, Bernhard; Bachler, Martin; Kellermair, Jörg; Eber, Bernd; Wassertheurer, Siegfried; Weber, Thomas
• Is Part Of: International journal of cardiology. Volume 190(2015)
• Page Start: 308
• Page End: 314
• Publication Date: 2015-07-01
• Subjects: Arterial wave reflections -- Systolic heart failure -- Reduced ejection fraction -- Wave separation -- Pulse wave velocity -- Pulse wave analysis; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.04.183
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-5273

Abstract

Abstract: Background: 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. Methods: 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). Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.