Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Author Spotlight: Assessing the Cardiovascular Profile of Patients with Metabolic Syndrome
Published on: September 27, 2024
Aortic Pulse Pressure Does Not Adequately Index Cardiovascular Risk Factor-Related Changes in Aortic Stiffness and
Tshegofatso H Motau1, Gavin R Norton1, Pinhas Sareli1
1Cardiovascular Pathophysiology and Genomics Research Unit, School of Physiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Insights
Central aortic pulse pressure (PPc) does not adequately reflect arterial changes from diabetes or hypertension. These findings suggest PPc is not a reliable indicator for assessing cardiovascular risk related to these common conditions.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular science
- Vascular function
- Hypertension research
Background:
- Conventional risk factors impact arteries, influencing aortic function and cardiovascular events.
- The utility of central aortic pulse pressure (PPc) in reflecting these arterial changes is uncertain.
- This study investigates the relationship between modifiable risk factors and aortic function, specifically concerning PPc.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine if changes in central aortic pulse pressure (PPc) accurately reflect arterial functional changes caused by modifiable risk factors.
- To assess the relationship between diabetes mellitus and hypertension with aortic function parameters.
- To evaluate the adequacy of PPc as an index for cardiovascular risk associated with these conditions.
Main Methods:
- A study involving 1,232 black South Africans from Johannesburg (SOWETO).
- Assessment of risk factors and aortic function using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), PPc, forward wave pressures (Pf), and backward wave pressures (Pb).
- Measurements were taken using applanation tonometry and SphygmoCor software.
Main Results:
- Diabetes mellitus was associated with increased PWV and Pf, but not with brachial or central aortic pulse pressure (PPc).
- Uncontrolled hypertension was associated with increased Pf, but not with brachial or central aortic pulse pressure (PPc).
- Adjustments were made for alternative risk factors and mean arterial pressure (MAP).
Conclusions:
- Neither brachial nor central aortic pulse pressure (PPc) adequately represent the relationship between modifiable risk factors (hypertension, diabetes) and aortic functional changes.
- PPc is not a sufficient index for assessing cardiovascular risk related to uncontrolled hypertension or diabetes mellitus.
- Further research may be needed to identify better indicators of vascular changes associated with these risk factors.
Background:
Through the impact of conventional risk factors on arteries, several changes in aortic function contribute to cardiovascular events. It is nevertheless uncertain whether these effects are accurately reflected by changes in central aortic pulse pressure (PPc). We, therefore, aimed to determine the extent to which relations between modifiable risk factors and aortic function translate into increases in PPc.
Methods:
In 1,232 black South Africans from the South West Township (SOWETO) of Johannesburg, we determined risk factors and aortic function from carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), aortic PPc, forward wave pressures (Pf), and reflected (backward) wave pressures (Pb) (applanation tonometry and SphygmoCor software).
Results:
With adjustments for alternative risk factors and distending pressure (mean arterial pressure (MAP)), diabetes mellitus (treatment or HbA1c > 6.5%, n = 151) was associated with an increased PWV (7.10 ± 2.09 vs. 6.17 ± 2.00 m/s, P < 0.0001), and Pf (26 ± 8 vs. 24 ± 8 mm Hg, P < 0.005), but neither brachial PP (46 ± 14 vs. 45 ± 13, P = 0.19), PPc (36 ± 12 vs. 35 ± 11 mm Hg, P = 0.48), nor Pb (17 ± 6 vs. 17 ± 6 mm Hg, P = 0.83). Moreover, independent of alternative risk factors and MAP, uncontrolled hypertension (office blood pressure > 140/90 mm Hg, n = 433) was associated with an increased Pf (26 ± 12 vs. 24 ± 10 mm Hg, P < 0.01), but not with changes in brachial PP (45 ± 19 vs. 44 ± 17, P = 0.75), PPc (35 ± 16 vs. 35 ± 15 mm Hg, P = 0.93), or Pb (18 ± 8 vs. 17 ± 8 mm Hg, P = 0.46).
Conclusions:
Neither brachial nor aortic PP are adequate indexes of relations between the modifiable conventional risk factors, uncontrolled hypertension or diabetes mellitus, and risk-related aortic functional changes.
Related Concept Videos
Sound as Pressure Waves
The pressure fluctuation depends on the difference in displacements between the successive points in the...
Factors affecting Blood pressure
Physiological Factors:
Intensity and Pressure of Sound Waves
Unlike the time average of a sinusoidal term, which is zero since it is positive...
Vapor Pressure
Definition and Measurement of Pressure: Atmospheric Pressure, Barometer, and Manometer
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction

