RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Menopause, a cardiovascular risk in mid-life women, is studied in terms of blood pressure mostly. Arterial stiffness (AS) and central hemodynamics (CH) are direct surrogates measured by pulse wave analysis (PWA) with no study from our region. OBJECTIVE: We studied AS, CH in relation to menopause using PWA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed in 134 middle-aged females divided into groups with or without menopause. Oscillometric PWA done by Mobil-o-Graph (IEM, Germany) gave - AS like augmentation pressure, augmentation index at heart rate (HR) 75, aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV), and total AS pulse pressure amplification; CH like aortic blood pressure, cardiac output and related parameters, peripheral resistance, stroke work, prevalent brachial/central hypertension, and raised central pulse pressure. They were further compared between groups, in relation to body mass index (BMI) and by multiple regressions with P < 0.05 as statistical significance. RESULTS: Postmenopausal women were significantly elder, physically inactive with comparable BMI and showed higher AS (only aPWV was significantly different) and CH. BMI was unrelated to AS or CH in postmenopausal group. Age (except for aPWV), BMI, and HR (except for AIx@75) were insignificant predictors, while systolic blood pressure (SBP) in premenopausal and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in postmenopausal group was major AS predictors. Age, HR, and BMI were insignificant predictors, while SBP more than DBP was significant predictors of CH. CONCLUSIONS: In obese, predominantly sedentary midlife Gujarati women, menopause negatively affects AS and hemodynamics, central more than peripheral. Menopause accelerates cardiovascular aging, independent of BMI, and age that calls for further studies.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Hypertension (HTN) and diabetes frequently coexist, imposing significant cardiovascular risk that is normally studied in terms of brachial blood pressure (bBP). Direct and superior parameters like central haemodynamics and arterial stiffness are studied scarcely. Pulse wave analysis (PWA) offers a non-invasive measurement of the same that we studied in diabetic hypertensives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a case-control study on 333 treated diabetic hypertensive cases and 333 euglycaemic normotensive controls. Oscillometric PWA was performed by Mobil-o-Graph (IEM, Aachen, Germany). Parameters were further analysed in relation to gender, physical activity, body mass index (BMI), glycaemic control, blood pressure control, and disease duration (cut-off 5 years). Multiple linear regressions were done to find significant associations. RESULTS: Cases had significantly higher brachial haemodynamics (blood pressure, heart rate (HR), and rate pressure product); arterial stiffness measures (augmentation pressure, augmentation index, pulse wave velocity, total arterial stiffness, and pulse pressure amplification), and central haemodynamics (central blood pressure, cardiac output, stroke work) than controls. In the case group, female gender, BMI ≥23, and uncontrolled blood pressures were significant factors that affected the results while other factors such as glycaemic control, physical activity, and duration did not. HR was significantly associated with study parameters. Brachial pressures were not significantly associated with corresponding aortic pressures. CONCLUSION: Diabetic hypertensives had adverse profile of cardiovascular parameters beyond bBP, related to female gender, and HTN and its control, more than that of diabetes. This baseline work suggests further study on these potential parameters.
