Elastic modulus of the radial artery wall material is not increased in patients with essential hypertension.

  • S Laurent
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • X Girerd
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • J J Mourad
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • P Lacolley
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • L Beck
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • P Boutouyrie
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • J P Mignot
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.
  • M Safar
    Department of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Broussais, Paris, France.

Search this article

Description

<jats:p>Hypertension is known to decrease arterial distensibility and systemic compliance. However, the arterial tree is not homogeneous, and it has been shown that the medium-size radial artery does not behave like the proximal, elastic, large, common carotid artery. Indeed, radial artery compliance in hypertensive patients (HTs) has been shown to be paradoxically increased when compared with that in normotensive control subjects (NTs) at the same blood pressure level. To determine whether this increase was due to hypertension-related hypertrophy of the arterial wall, radial artery functional and geometric parameters from 22 NTs (mean +/- SD, 44 +/- 11 years) were compared with those from 25 age- and sex-matched never-treated essential HTs (48 +/- 12 years) by using a high-precision ultrasonic, echo-tracking system coupled to a photoplethysmograph (Finapres system), which allows simultaneous arterial internal diameter, intima-media thickness, and finger blood pressure measurements. When the values for HTs were compared with those of NTs at their respective mean arterial pressures, HTs had similar internal diameter (2.50 +/- 0.56 versus 2.53 +/- 0.32 mm, mean +/- SD) and greater intima-media thickness (0.40 +/- 0.06 versus 0.28 +/- 0.05 mm, P < .001) measurements and increased arterial wall cross-sectional areas (3.79 +/- 1.14 versus 2.45 +/- 0.57 mm2, P < .001). Circumferential wall stress was not significantly different between the two groups. Compliance calculated for a given blood pressure, ie, 100 mm Hg (C100), was greater in HTs than NTs (3.46 +/- 2.41 versus 2.10 +/- 1.55 m2.kPa-1 x 10(-8), P < .05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</jats:p>

Journal

Citations (3)*help

See more

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top