P6.15 ATTENUATION OF ARTERIAL STIFFNESS GRADIENT WITH AGE AND ITS IMPACT ON CENTRAL PULSE WAVE PROFILE IN DIALYSIS PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arterial stiffness has been considered as an index of vascular ageing. However, the relationship between age and stiffness of various segments of the arterial tree is heterogeneous. Moreover, the hemodynamic impact of vascular stiffness is thought to be related to the attenuation or even reversal of the physiological arterial stiffness gradient. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the impact of age on aortic (central elastic artery) and brachial (muscular conduit artery) stiffness and to assess hemodynamic correlates of the arterial stiffness gradient. In 310 dialysis patients (67 years [25 th –75 th percentiles: 56–76], 185(60%) men, 134(43%) diabetes and 162(52%) cardiovascular disease), we measured aortic and brachial stiffness by pulse wave velocity of carotid-femoral (cf-PWV) and carotid-radial (cr-PWV) using direct distances (Com-plior). Arterial stiffness gradient was determined by cf-PWV/cr-PWV (PWV ratio). Central pulse wave parameters were obtained through generalized transfer function applied to the radial artery pulse profile (Sphygmocor). Mean cf-PWV, cr-PWV and PWV ratio were respectively of 13.52 ±4.07m/s, 8.76 ±1.68m/s and 1.59 ±0.52m/s. Cr-PWV decreased with age (β = −0.031, R = −0.274, P0.001), while cf-PWV (β = 0.144, R = 0.529, P0.001) and PWV ratio (β = 0.021, R = 0.613, P0.001) increased. In contrast to cf-PWV and cr-PWV, PWV ratio was not associated with MBP (P = 0.997). The use of PWV ratio may be a more logical choice for risk determination than aortic stiffness as it provides a better estimation of the loss of arterial stiffness gradient and is not influenced by MBP in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".