The prognostic value of central systolic blood pressure has been established recently. At present, its noninvasive assessment is limited by the need of dedicated equipment and trained operators. Moreover, ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring of central pressures are not feasible. An algorithm enabling conventional automated oscillometric blood pressure monitors to assess central systolic pressure could be of value. We compared central systolic pressure, calculated with a transfer-function like method (ARCSolver algorithm), using waveforms recorded with a regular oscillometric cuff suitable for ambulatory measurements, with simultaneous high-fidelity invasive recordings, and with noninvasive estimations using a validated device, operating with radial tonometry and a generalized transfer function. Both studies revealed a good agreement between the oscillometric cuff-based central systolic pressure and the comparator. In the invasive study, composed of 30 patients, mean difference between oscillometric cuff/ARCSolver-based and invasive central systolic pressures was 3.0 mm Hg (SD: 6.0 mm Hg) with invasive calibration of brachial waveforms and −3.0 mm Hg (SD: 9.5 mm Hg) with noninvasive calibration of brachial waveforms. Results were similar when the reference method (radial tonometry/transfer function) was compared with invasive measurements. In the noninvasive study, composed of 111 patients, mean difference between oscillometric cuff/ARCSolver–derived and radial tonometry/transfer function–derived central systolic pressures was −0.5 mm Hg (SD: 4.7 mm Hg). In conclusion, a novel transfer function-like algorithm, using brachial cuff-based waveform recordings, is suited to provide a realistic estimation of central systolic pressure.

European Society of Hypertension guidelines recommend use of carotid– femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) as a favored measure of aortic stiffness. However, there is no consensus on the measurement of distance travelled by the pulse wave along the aorta to the femoral artery. The aim of our study was to compare cfPWV, calculated with commonly used noninvasive methods for travel distance assessment, against aortic PWV measured invasively. One hundred and thirty-five patients had aortic PWV measured invasively during cardiac catheterization, from the delay in wave foot and distance travelled as the catheter was withdrawn from the ascending aorta to the aortic bifurcation. On the following day, noninvasive cfPWV was assessed, using the SphygmoCor system, relating the delay between carotid and femoral wavefoot to travel distance, estimated with five different methods on body surface. Mean travel times were in good agreement [(travel time) TTinvasive was 63 ms, TTnoninvasive was 59.3 ms, Spearman's R: 0.8, P < 0.00001]. Mean PWVinvasive was 8.5 m/s. CfPWV, as assessed noninvasively, depended largely on the method used for travel distance estimation: 11.5, 9.9, 8.7, 11.9, and 9.6 m/s, using direct carotid–femoral distance, carotid–femoral minus carotid–suprasternal notch distances, suprasternal notch–femoral minus carotid–suprasternal notch distances, suprasternal notch–femoral plus carotid–suprasternal notch distances, and suprasternal notch–symphysis distance, respectively. There was acceptable correspondence between PWVinvasive and cfPWVnoninvasive (Spearman's R: 0.73–0.77, P < 0.0001). For noninvasive assessment of cfPWV, estimation of pulse wave travel distance is critical. Best agreement with invasive measurements was found for the method of subtracting carotid–suprasternal notch distance from suprasternal notch–femoral distance.

We recently developed a novel method for assessment of arterial wave reflections (ARCSolver method): based on adopted Windkessel methods, flow curves are estimated from pressure waveforms, and wave separation analysis is performed, yielding the amplitudes of the forward and backward waves. The aim of this study was to investigate their clinical correlates and prognostic impact. In 725 patients (417 men; mean age, 64 years) undergoing coronary angiography, we determined wave reflections from radial tonometry and transfer function-derived aortic waveforms using pulse wave analysis, as well as wave separation analysis. Measures of pulsatile arterial function were statistically significant, although moderately associated with markers of cardiac load and subclinic cardiac, renal, and aortic end-organ damage. After a median follow-up duration of 1399 days, 139 patients reached the combined cardiovascular end point (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral revascularization). In univariate analysis, the relative risk of the combined end point increased with increasing levels of incident pressure wave height, augmented pressure, and forward and backward wave amplitude (hazard ratio for 1 SD was 1.302, 1.236, 1.226, and 1.276; P <0.01 for all, respectively). In multivariate analysis, backward wave amplitude was the most consistent predictor of the combined end point. Of note, its predictive value was independent of brachial systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressures and was superior to brachial pulse pressure. In conclusion, the amplitude of the reflected wave, as assessed with a novel method for wave separation, is associated with hypertensive end organ damage and is an independent predictor of cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.

Due to the cyclic function of the human heart, pressure and flow in the circulation are pulsatile rather than continuous. Addressing pulsatile haemodynamics starts with the most convenient measurement, brachial pulse pressure, which is widely available, related to development and treatment of heart failure (HF), but often confounded in patients with established HF. The next level of analysis consists of central (rather than brachial) pressures and, more importantly, of wave reflections. The latter are closely related to left ventricular late systolic afterload, ventricular remodelling, diastolic dysfunction, exercise capacity, and, in the long-term, the risk of new-onset HF. Wave reflection may also represent a suitable therapeutic target. Treatments for HF with preserved and reduced ejection fraction, based on a reduction of wave reflection, are emerging. A full understanding of ventricular-arterial coupling, however, requires dedicated analysis of time-resolved pressure and flow signals, which can be readily accomplished with contemporary non-invasive imaging and modelling techniques. This review provides a summary of our current understanding of pulsatile haemodynamics in HF.

BACKGROUND: Arterial stiffness, as measured by arterial pulse wave velocity (PWV), is an established biomarker for cardiovascular risk and target-organ damage in individuals with hypertension. With the emergence of new devices for assessing PWV, it has become evident that some of these devices yield results that display significant discrepancies compared with previous devices. This discrepancy underscores the importance of comprehensive validation procedures and the need for international recommendations. METHODS: A stepwise approach utilizing the modified Delphi technique, with the involvement of key scientific societies dedicated to arterial stiffness research worldwide, was adopted to formulate, through a multidisciplinary vision, a shared approach to the validation of noninvasive arterial PWV measurement devices. RESULTS: A set of recommendations has been developed, which aim to provide guidance to clinicians, researchers, and device manufacturers regarding the validation of new PWV measurement devices. The intention behind these recommendations is to ensure that the validation process can be conducted in a rigorous and consistent manner and to promote standardization and harmonization among PWV devices, thereby facilitating their widespread adoption in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: It is hoped that these recommendations will encourage both users and developers of PWV measurement devices to critically evaluate and validate their technologies, ultimately leading to improved consistency and comparability of results. This, in turn, will enhance the clinical utility of PWV as a valuable tool for assessing arterial stiffness and informing cardiovascular risk stratification and management in individuals with hypertension.