Assessment of Central Arterial Hemodynamics in Children: Comparison of Noninvasive and Invasive Measurements

Differences between brachial and aortic blood pressure in adolescence and their implications for diagnosis of hypertension

OBJECTIVES

Blood pressure (BP) is the leading global cause of mortality, and its prevalence is increasing in children and adolescents. Aortic BP is lower than brachial BP in adults. We aimed to assess the extent of this difference and its impact on the diagnosis of hypertension among adolescents.

METHODS

We used data from 3850 participants from a UK cohort of births in the early 1990s in the Southwest of England, who attended their ∼17-year follow-up and had valid measures of brachial and aortic BP at that clinic [mean (SD) age 17.8 (0.4) years, 66% female individuals]. Data are presented as mean differences [95% prediction intervals] for both sexes.

RESULTS

Aortic systolic BP (SBP) was lower than brachial SBP [male, -22.3 (-31.2, -13.3) mmHg; female, -17.8 (-25.5, -10.0) mmHg]. Differences between aortic and brachial diastolic BP (DBP) were minimal. Based on brachial BP measurements, 101 male individuals (6%) and 22 female individuals (1%) were classified as hypertensive. In contrast, only nine male individuals (<1%) and 14 female individuals (<1%) met the criteria for hypertension based on aortic BP, and the predictive value of brachial BP for aortic hypertension was poor (positive-predictive value = 13.8%). Participants with aortic hypertension had a higher left ventricular mass index than those with brachial hypertension.

CONCLUSION

Brachial BP substantially overestimates aortic BP in adolescents because of marked aortic-to-brachial pulse pressure amplification. The use of brachial BP measurement may result in an overdiagnosis of hypertension during screening in adolescence.

Aortic systolic and pulse pressure invasively and non-invasively obtained: Comparative analysis of recording techniques, arterial sites of measurement, waveform analysis algorithms and calibration methods

Background: The non-invasive estimation of aortic systolic (aoSBP) and pulse pressure (aoPP) is achieved by a great variety of devices, which differ markedly in the: 1) principles of recording (applied technology), 2) arterial recording site, 3) model and mathematical analysis applied to signals, and/or 4) calibration scheme. The most reliable non-invasive procedure to obtain aoSBP and aoPP is not well established. Aim: To evaluate the agreement between aoSBP and aoPP values invasively and non-invasively obtained using different: 1) recording techniques (tonometry, oscilometry/plethysmography, ultrasound), 2) recording sites [radial, brachial (BA) and carotid artery (CCA)], 3) waveform analysis algorithms (e.g., direct analysis of the CCA pulse waveform vs. peripheral waveform analysis using general transfer functions, N-point moving average filters, etc.), 4) calibration schemes (systolic-diastolic calibration vs. methods using BA diastolic and mean blood pressure (bMBP); the latter calculated using different equations vs. measured directly by oscillometry, and 5) different equations to estimate bMBP (i.e., using a form factor of 33% ("033"), 41.2% ("0412") or 33% corrected for heart rate ("033HR"). Methods: The invasive aortic (aoBP) and brachial pressure (bBP) (catheterization), and the non-invasive aoBP and bBP were simultaneously obtained in 34 subjects. Non-invasive aoBP levels were obtained using different techniques, analysis methods, recording sites, and calibration schemes. Results: 1) Overall, non-invasive approaches yielded lower aoSBP and aoPP levels than those recorded invasively. 2) aoSBP and aoPP determinations based on CCA recordings, followed by BA recordings, were those that yielded values closest to those recorded invasively. 3) The "033HR" and "0412" calibration schemes ensured the lowest mean error, and the "033" method determined aoBP levels furthest from those recorded invasively. 4) Most of the non-invasive approaches considered overestimated and underestimated aoSBP at low (i.e., 80 mmHg) and high (i.e., 180 mmHg) invasive aoSBP values, respectively. 5) The higher the invasively measured aoPP, the higher the level of underestimation provided by the non-invasive methods. Conclusion: The recording method and site, the mathematical method/model used to quantify aoSBP and aoPP, and to calibrate waveforms, are essential when estimating aoBP. Our study strongly emphasizes the need for methodological transparency and consensus for the non-invasive aoBP assessment.

Relationship between heart rate and central aortic blood pressure: implications for assessment and treatment of isolated systolic hypertension in the young

Isolated systolic hypertension in the young (ISHY) remains a challenging problem, partly due to the differences in central aortic pressure observed in studies investigating ISHY. The fundamental relationship between heart rate and central aortic pressure, and more precisely, the relationship between heart rate and amplification of central aortic pressure in the periphery, underpins the assessment and, as a consequence, the treatment of ISHY. Physiology warrants that an increase in heart rate would lead to increased amplification of the pressure pulse between the aorta and the brachial artery. Heart rate generally decreases with age, in particular over the first two decades of life. Thus, a higher heart rate in the young would result in higher pulse pressure amplification, and therefore an elevated brachial systolic pressure would not necessarily translate to elevated aortic systolic pressure. However, elevated heart rate is not a consistent feature in ISHY, and studies have shown that ISHY can present with either high or low central aortic systolic pressure. In this brief review, we summarize the physiological aspects underlying the relationship between heart rate and central aortic blood pressure and its amplification in the brachial artery, how this relationship changes with age, and examine the implications of these effects on the assessment and treatment of ISHY.

Vascular Ageing in Youth: A Call to Action

Extensive evidence shows that risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) begin to develop early in life. Childhood obesity and elevated blood pressure (BP) have become overwhelmingly challenging, with 57% of today's children predicted to be obese by the age of 35 years, and global rates of hypertension in children and adolescents increasing by 75% from 2000 to 2015. Thus, there is an urgent need for tools that can assess early CVD risk in youth, which may lead to better risk stratification, preventative intervention, and personalised medicine. Vascular ageing (the deterioration in vascular structure and function) is a pivotal progenitor of health degeneration associated with elevated BP. Exposure to adverse environmental and genetic factors from fetal life promotes the development and accumulation of subclinical vascular changes that direct an individual towards a trajectory of early vascular ageing (EVA)-an independent predictor of target organ damage in the heart, brain, and kidneys. Therefore, characterising vascular ageing from youth may provide a window into cardiovascular risk later in life. However, vascular ageing measurements only have value when techniques are accurate/validated and when reliable thresholds are available for defining normal ranges and ranges that signal increased risk of disease. The aim of this paper is to summarise current evidence on the importance of vascular ageing assessment in youth and the impact of interventions to prevent or delay EVA, to highlight the need for standardisation and validation of measurement techniques in children and adolescents, and the importance of establishing reference values for vascular ageing measures in this population.