Carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity assessment by two different methods: implications for risk assessment

The importance of accurate measurement of aortic stiffness in patients with chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A key driver in this pathology is increased aortic stiffness, which is a strong, independent predictor of CV mortality in this population. Aortic stiffening is a potentially modifiable biomarker of CV dysfunction and in risk stratification for patients with CKD and ESRD. Previous work has suggested that therapeutic modification of aortic stiffness may ameliorate CV mortality. Nevertheless, future clinical implementation relies on the ability to accurately and reliably quantify stiffness in renal disease. Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is an indirect measure of stiffness and is the accepted standard for non-invasive assessment of aortic stiffness. It has typically been measured using techniques such as applanation tonometry, which is easy to use but hindered by issues such as the inability to visualize the aorta. Advances in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging now allow direct measurement of stiffness, using aortic distensibility, in addition to PWV. These techniques allow measurement of aortic stiffness locally and are obtainable as part of a comprehensive, multiparametric CV assessment. The evidence cannot yet provide a definitive answer regarding which technique or parameter can be considered superior. This review discusses the advantages and limitations of non-invasive methods that have been used to assess aortic stiffness, the key studies that have assessed aortic stiffness in patients with renal disease and why these tools should be standardized for use in clinical trial work.

Comparative Study of the Efficacy of Olmesartan/Amlodipine vs. Perindopril/Amlodipine in Peripheral and Central Blood Pressure Parameters After Missed Dose in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Central aortic blood pressure (CBP) and CBP-derived parameters are independent predictors of cardiovascular risk. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors plus calcium channel blockers are the recommended first-line treatments in hypertensive diabetic patients; however, the effect in reducing CBP when a dose is skipped has not been established yet. The aim was to determine whether the fixed-dose combination of olmesartan/amlodipine (OLM/AML) provides equal efficacy and safety as the perindopril/AML (PER/AML) combination in reducing CBP, augmentation index (AIx), and pulse wave velocity (PWV) when a drug dose is missed.

METHODS

In this noninferiority, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy parallel group, controlled design trial, 88 patients received either OLM 20-40mg/AML 5-10mg (41 patients) or PER 4-8mg/AML 5-10mg (47 patients) for 24 weeks. The main endpoint was the aortic systolic BP (SBP) after 24 weeks of treatment at 48 hours from the last administration.

RESULTS

The OLM/AML combination reached the noninferiority criteria in reducing central systolic BP after 24 weeks of treatment and after the missed dose, compared to the PER/AML combination (-17 and -8mm Hg, respectively). Peripheral BP, AIx, and PWV were significantly lower in both groups after 24 weeks of treatment and 48 hours after the missed dose, observing a trend to a greater reduction in CBP-derived parameters in the OLM/AML group.

CONCLUSIONS

The OLM/AML combination is safe, well tolerated, and not inferior to the combination of PER/AML in lowering CBP and CBP-derived parameters in diabetic patients. OLM/AML provides longer-lasting efficacy in terms of CBP reduction compared to PER/AML.