No abstract

Introduction: Diabetes is a modern epidemic imposing significant cardiovascular risk. Immediate and discrete parameters such as arterial stiffness and central hemodynamics are studied scarcely. Pulse wave analysis (PWA) offers noninvasive measurement of the same and we performed that in diabetics. Materials and Methods: We performed a case–control study on 148 treated diabetic not on antihypertensive and 148 nondiabetic normotensive controls. Oscillometric PWA was performed by Mobil-O-Graph (IEM). Parameters were further analyzed for effect of gender, physical activity, body mass index (BMI; cut-off 23), glycemic control, and disease duration (cut-off 4 years). Multiple linear regressions were used to find significant predictors. P <0.05 was taken as statistical significance. Results: Cases had significantly raised brachial hemodynamics (blood pressure, heart rate, rate pressure product), arterial stiffness (augmentation pressure, augmentation index, pulse wave velocity, total arterial stiffness, pulse pressure amplification), and central hemodynamics (central blood pressure, cardiac output, stroke work) than controls. In the case group, female gender, BMI ≥ 23, and physical inactivity were the significant factors affecting results (arterial stiffness more than central hemodynamics); glycemic control and duration were not. Heart rate was the major predictor of study parameters. Brachial pressure parameters were not significant predictors of corresponding central pressure parameters. Conclusion: Gujarati diabetics not using any antihypertensive had adverse profile of beyond brachial blood pressure discrete cardiovascular parameters, independent of duration and glycemic control, related to gender, BMI, and physical activity, indicating vascular progeria in the absence of hypertension. This baseline study suggests further work on these potential parameters.

Hypertension has enormous prevalence, threatening future prediction, tremendous impact on cardiovascular health, and cost burden of pharmacotherapy. [1] Most studies of hypertension and pharmacotherapy focus on first-line anti-hypertensives and brachial blood pressure (bBP). BP is just one of many determinants of cardiovascular risk. [2] Parameters about functioning of aorta and heart are more discrete and direct in risk stratification. Routinely measured bBP does not tell about the status of aortic compliance and central hemodynamics. Similarly, along with the first-line anti-hypertensives, drugs such as aspirin, statin, beta-blocker (BB), and antidiabetic drugs are also used in hypertensives. BBs are usually used as the second-line agents with some specific indication and metformin as drug for type 2 diabetes in most cases. Statin is used to treat dyslipidemia, and aspirin is given to prevent ischemic heart disease. These preventive pharmacotherapies indicate both risk of underlying indicator for use as well as benefit offered by correction of the same by the drug. Frequency and concomitant use of these are expected more in our hypertensives with association of diabetes and heart disease in majority, as we previously documented. [3] These drugs are known to affect the pathology of essential hypertension individually and may have impact on some discrete aortic and central hemodynamic parameters.

Introduction: Hypertension is the most prevalent noncommunicable disorder, studied in terms of brachial blood pressure. Direct parameters like central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness, though superior, are not studied much. The same can be studied by pulse-wave analysis (PWA) and we did that in euglycemic treated hypertensives. Materials and Methods: A case-control study was conducted in 258 treated euglycemic hypertensives and 258 matched controls. Oscillometric PWA was accomplished by Mobil-O-Graph (IEM, Germany). Parameters were further analyzed for the effect of gender, physical activity, body mass index (BMI) (cutoff 23), blood pressure control, and duration (cutoff 5 years). Multiple linear regressions were used to find significant predictors. P < 0.05 was taken as statistically significant. Results: Cases had significantly higher brachial arterial parameters (blood pressure, heart rate, rate pressure product), arterial stiffness (augmentation pressure, augmentation index, pulse-wave velocity, total arterial stiffness, pulse pressure amplification), and central hemodynamics (central blood pressure, cardiac output, stroke work) compared to age, gender, and BMI-matched controls. In the case group, female gender, BMI ≥ 23, and uncontrolled blood pressure were significant factors affecting results. Heart rate and pulse pressure were major predictors of study parameters. Central pressure parameters were not predicted significantly by corresponding brachial pressure parameters. Conclusion: PWA revealed the adverse profile of arterial stiffness and central hemodynamics in treated Gujarati hypertensives, associated with female gender, BMI, and blood pressure control, predicted mainly by heart rate and pulse pressure, independent of brachial blood pressure. It indicates both potential and further study of these parameters.

Introduction:Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a significant risk factor for nephropathy and cardiovascular morbidity. Pulse wave analysis (PWA) gives direct inference of brachial hemodynamics (BH) and central hemodynamics (CH). We studied relation of them with diabetic nephropathy (DN) among type-2 diabetics (T2D).Methods:We studied oscillometric PWA by a cross-sectional study in 160 T2Ds. Using Mobil-o-Graph (IEM, Germany), we derived BH (blood pressure, pulse pressure index, rate pressure product) and CH (aortic pressure, cardiac index, stroke volume index, stroke work). They were further compared and associated with DN in terms of creatinine, proteinuria, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).Results:There were 89 males, mean age 56 years, mean duration 4.8 years, 80% hypertensive predominantly using ACE inhibitors, poor glycemic blood pressure (BP) control, mainly mild-to-moderate DN, mean eGFR 88.2, 34% prevalence of proteinuria. Arterial stiffness was high with female disadvantage. BH and CH parameters were not different with or without DN using proteinuria or eGFR (60 cutoff) criteria. BH, CH correlated insignificantly with creatinine and eGFR. Female disadvantage, correlation with bSBP and aSBP were only significant results.Conclusions:BH and CH are not related to eGFR and proteinuria in predominantly hypertensive, Gujarati diabetics with mild-to-moderate nephropathy suggesting need of other cardiovascular parameters.