Aortic-Brachial Pulse Wave Velocity Ratio: A Measure of Arterial Stiffness Gradient Not Affected by Mean Arterial Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Aortic stiffness, measured by carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV), is used for the prediction of cardiovascular risk. This mini-review describes the nonlinear relationship between cf-PWV and operational blood pressure, presents the proposed methods to adjust for this relationship, and discusses a potential place for aortic-brachial PWV ratio (a measure of arterial stiffness gradient) as a blood pressure-independent measure of vascular aging. Summary: PWV is inherently dependent on the operational blood pressure. In cross-sectional studies, PWV adjustment for mean arterial pressure (MAP) is preferred, but still remains a nonoptimal approach, as the relationship between PWV and blood pressure is nonlinear and varies considerably among individuals due to heterogeneity in genetic background, vascular tone, and vascular remodeling. Extrapolations from the blood pressure-independent stiffness parameter β (β0) have led to the creation of stiffness index β, which can be used for local stiffness. A similar approach has been used for cardio-ankle PWV to generate a blood pressure-independent cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI). It was recently demonstrated that stiffness index β and CAVI remain slightly blood pressure-dependent, and a more appropriate formula has been proposed to make the proper adjustments. On the other hand, the negative impact of aortic stiffness on clinical outcomes is thought to be mediated through attenuation or reversal of the arterial stiffness gradient, which can also be influenced by a reduction in peripheral medium-sized muscular arteries in conditions that predispose to accelerate vascular aging. Arterial stiffness gradient, assessed by aortic-brachial PWV ratio, is emerging to be at least as good as cf-PWV for risk prediction, but has the advantage of not being affected by operating MAP. Key Messages: The negative impacts of aortic stiffness on clinical outcomes are proposed to be mediated through attenuation or reversal of arterial stiffness gradient. Aortic-brachial PWV ratio, a measure of arterial stiffness gradient, is independent of MAP.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".