Editorial Article

Hemodynamic Parameters for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment

Tania Pereira1,2

1Researcher in the Department of Instrumentation in University of Coimbra, Portugal.

Corresponding Author:Tania Pereira, Researcher in the Department of Instrumentation in University of Coimbra, Portugal, Tel: +351 239 410 109; E-Mail: taniapereira@lei.fis.uc.pt

  • Received Date: 30 Jan 2016   Accepted Date: 01 Feb 2016   Published Date: 02 Feb 2016
  • Copyright © 2016 Pereira T

Citation:Pereira T. (2016). Hemodynamic Parameters for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment. M J Cardiol. 1(1): e001.

INTRODUCTION

Hemodynamic parameters have been recognized as important biomarkers for cardiovascular (CV) assessment .Several efforts have been made to develop non-invasive techniques that allow fast, accurate and low cost devices in order to implement in clinical routines. The ability to detect and monitor change in the vital signals that represent the influence of hemodynamic condition, cardiovascular function, and the physical properties of arterial wall, could be a powerful tool for the management of the asymptomatic diseases intensive care patients monitoring and evaluation of therapeutically outcomes [1-5]. Blood pressure (BP) estimation continues to be the most important measurement of the cardiovascular system in all of clinical medicine [6]. The pulse wave velocity (PWV) is an emerging biomarker useful for CV risk stratification of patients [7-8]. However other hemodynamic parameters have been correlated with changes in the cardiovascular system and could help in the non- invasive diagnosis [9-14].
HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS Blood pressure is the leading risk factor for mortality worldwide, and several dimensions of BP are associated with an increased risk of vascular disease, such as the systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure [15-16]. Recent guidelines have a more integrative approach to estimate the cardiovascular risk, and the PWV is widely accepted as a marker of arterial stiffness .The correlation of PWV with diseases and biological features has been extensively studied in large groups. The influence of hypertension cardiac disease, atherosclerosis, gender, age and smoke effect were evaluated [17-23]. PWV measurements were also used for the assessment of the drug therapy responses, evaluate the efficacy and monitoring the effects [24-25]. Hemodynamically, rather than merely consider its maximum and minimum values, it should be taken into account the overall shape of the arterial pulse pressure curve to describe the mechanical properties of the arterial tree and cardiac function to give an adequate description of the arterial system behaviour [26]. Several indexes such as augmentation index (AIx), subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR), maximum rate of pressure change, ejection time index (ETI) and area under the curve (AUC), can be derived by the descriptive and quantitative analysis of the arterial pressure pulse waveform [9-14]. Consistent characteristics change in the pressure pulse wave shape have been described with aging and disease states predisposing to an increase in vascular events [27]. The correlation between the parameters has been studied, mainly between BP and PWV [28,29]. The determination of the influence between the metrics of hemodynamic signals represents the current great challenge to understand the cardiovascular functions and for developing a useful tool for risk assessment. The assessment of the cardiovascular system condition based on multi-parameters incorporated into risk prediction models allows a more precise and accurate diagnosis of the heart and the arterial tree condition. The appropriate management of classical risk factors such as (age, gender, smoking habits, hypertension, body mass index) together with new hemodynamic biomarkers (BP, PWV, SEVR, ETI, AUC) represent an important improvement of accurate diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Previous studies demonstrated that hemodynamic parameters are an independent predictor of changes in the cardiovascular system. The current great challenge is to develop a system that allows the measurement of multiparameters in non-invasive way and combined with powerful algorithms, which provides the assessment of cardiovascular condition and estimate the risk level.

REFERENCES

  1. Kadoglou NPE, Papadakis I, Moulakakis KG, Ikonomidis I, et al. (2012). Arterial stiffness and novel biomarkers in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms Regul Pept. 179(1-3), 50- 54.
  2. Wang H and Zhang P. (2008). A model for automatic identification of human pulse signals. 9(10), 1382-1389.
  3. Janic M, Lunder M and Šabovic M. (2014). Arterial Stiffness and Cardiovascular Therapy. 9(11), 1382.
  4. Boutouyrie P and Vermeersch SJ. (2010). Determinants of pulse wave velocity in healthy people and in the presence of cardiovascular risk factors: ‘establishing normal and reference values. Eur. Heart J. 31(19), 2338-50.
  5. Vasan RS. (2006). Biomarkers of cardiovascular disease: Molecular basis and practical considerations. Circulation, 113(19), 2335-2362.
  6. Pickering TW, Hall TG, Appel JE, Falker LJ, et al. (2005). Hemodynamic parameters for cardiovascular risk assessment Tânia Pereira 2 Rocella, E.J.Kurtz. Recommendations for Blood Pressure Measurement in Humans and Experimental Animals. Circulation. 111, 697-716.
  7. Pereira T, Correia C and Cardoso J. (2015). Novel Methods for Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 35(5), 555-565.
  8. Laurent S, Cockcroft J, Bortel LV, Boutouyrie P, et al. (2006). Expert consensus document on arterial stiffness: methodological issues and clinical applications. Eur. Heart J. 27(21), 2588-605.
  9. Payne RA, Hilling-Smith RC, Webb DJ, Maxwell SR, et al (2007). Augmentation index assessed by applanation tonometry is elevated in Marfan Syndrome. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2, 43.
  10. Crilly M, Coch C, Bruce M, Clark H, et al, (2007). Indices of cardiovascular function derived from peripheral pulse wave analysis using radial applanation tonometry: a measurement repeatability study. Vasc. Med. 12(3), 189-197.
  11. Sharman JE, Davies JE, Jenkins C and Marwick TH. (2009). Augmentation index, left ventricular contractility, and wave reflection. Hypertension. 54(5), 1099-1105.
  12. Chemla D, Nitenberg A, Teboul JL, Richard C, et al. (2008). Subendocardial viability ratio estimated by arterial tonometry: a critical evaluation in elderly hypertensive patients with increased aortic stiffness. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 35(8), 909-15.
  13. Weissler AM, Harris WS and Clyde D. (1968). Systolic Time Intervals in Heart Failure in Man. Circulation. 37, 149-159.
  14. Weissler AM, Peeler RG and Roehll WH. (1961). Relationships between left ventricular ejection time, stroke volume, and heart rate in normal individuals and patients with cardiovascular disease. Am. Heart J. 62(3), 367-378.
  15. Schillaci G, Pirro M and Mannarino E. (2009). Assessing Cardiovascular Risk Should We Discard Diastolic Blood Pressure? Circulation. 119(2), 210-212.
  16. Larson MG, Khan SA, Wong ND, Leip EP, Kannel WB, et al (2001). Does the Relation of Blood Pressure to Coronary Heart Change With Aging? The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 103, 1245-1249.
  17. Asmar R, Benetos A, London G, Hugue C, et al. (1995). Aortic Distensibility in Normotensive, Untreated Hypertensive Patients,” Blood Press. 4, 48-54.
  18. Bortolotto L, Safar ME, Billaud E, Lacroix C, et al. (1999). Plasma Homocysteine, Aortic Stiffness, and Renal Function in Hypertensive Patients. Hypertension. 34(4), 837-842.
  19. Boutouyrie P, Tropeano AI, Asmar R, Gautier I, et al. (2002). Aortic Stiffness Is an Independent Predictor of Primary Coronary Events in Hypertensive Patients: A Longitudinal Study. Hypertension. 39(1), 10-15.
  20. Hofmann B, Riemer M, Erbs C, Plehn A, et al. (2014). Carotid to Femoral Pulse Wave Velocity Reflects the Extent of Coronary Artery Disease. J. Clin. Hypertens. 16(9), 629-633.
  21. Blacher J, Asmar R, Djane S, London GM, et al, (1999). Aortic Pulse Wave Velocity as a Marker of Cardiovascular Risk in Hypertensive Patients. Hypertension. 33(5), 1111-1117.
  22. Willum-Hansen T, Staessen C, Torp-Pedersen J, Rasmussen S, et al. (2006). Prognostic value of aortic pulse wave velocity as index of arterial stiffness in the general population. Circulation. 113(5), 664-670.
  23. Asmar R, Benetos A, Topouchian J, Laurent P, et al, Assessment of Arterial Distensibility by Automatic Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement. Hypertension. 26, 485-490.
  24. Raison J, Rudnichi A and Safar M. (2002). Effects of atorvastatin on aortic pulse wave velocity in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia: a preliminary study. J. Hum. Hypertens. 16(10), 705-710.
  25. Protogerou A, Blacher J, Stergiou GS, Achimastos A, et al, (2009). Blood Pressure Response under Chronic Antihypertensive Drug Therapy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53(5), 445-451.
  26. Stoner L, Young JM and Fryer S. (2012). Assessments of arterial stiffness and endothelial function using pulse wave analysis. Int. J. Vasc. Med. 903107.
  27. McEniery CM, Yasmin, Hall IR, Qasem A, et al. (2005). Normal Vascular Aging: Differential Effects on Wave Reflection and Aortic Pulse Wave Velocity. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 46(9), 1753-1760.
  28. Kim EJ, Park CG, Park JS, Suh SY, Choi CU, et al. (2007). Relationship between blood pressure parameters and pulse wave velocity in normotensive and hypertensive subjects: invasive study,” J. Hum. Hypertens. 21(2), 141-148.
  29. Gesche H, Grosskurth D, Küchler G and Patzak A. (2012). Continuous blood pressure measurement by using the pulse transit time: Comparison to a cuff-based method. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 112, 309-315.

Citation:
Pereira T. (2016). Hemodynamic Parameters for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment. M J Cardiol. 1(1): e001.