Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 11, 2025

Measuring the Carotid to Femoral Pulse Wave Velocity Cf-PWV to Evaluate Arterial Stiffness
Published on: May 3, 2018
Age-Specific Approach to Arterial Stiffness Prediction in Apparently Healthy Patients
Anna Bragina1,2, Yulia Rodionova1,2, Natalia Druzhinina1,2
1Department of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, 19991 Moscow, Russia.
Insights
Age-related cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) thresholds better predict arterial stiffness in individuals under 50. For those 50 and older, a universal CAVI threshold shows greater predictive value for arterial stiffness.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Vascular Biology
- Preventive Medicine
Background:
- Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors are prevalent in individuals without diagnosed CVD.
- Arterial stiffness is a key predictor and mechanism in CVD development.
- Predicting future cardiovascular events is crucial for preventive strategies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the predictive accuracy of age-related versus universal cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) reference values for detecting arterial stiffness.
- To identify optimal CAVI thresholds for risk stratification in individuals without CVD.
- To inform clinical practice regarding the assessment of arterial stiffness.
Main Methods:
- A study involving 600 participants (43% male, 57% female, mean age 36.0 ± 18.3 years).
- Assessment included anthropometric measurements, obesity markers, and arterial stiffness evaluation via sphygmomanometry.
- Predictive models utilized age-related (CAVI Age) and universal (CAVI ≥ 9.0) thresholds.
Main Results:
- In participants < 50 years, the CAVI Age model showed higher sensitivity, specificity, and AUC (0.802) compared to CAVI ≥ 9 (AUC 0.674).
- In participants ≥ 50 years, the CAVI ≥ 9 model demonstrated a higher AUC (0.787) than the CAVI Age model (AUC 0.675).
- Both models were significant predictors of arterial stiffness in their respective age groups.
Conclusions:
- Age-specific CAVI thresholds are more effective for predicting arterial stiffness in individuals under 50.
- A universal CAVI threshold (≥ 9.0) is more advantageous for predicting arterial stiffness in individuals aged 50 and above.
- Tailoring CAVI assessment to age groups can improve the detection of arterial stiffness and inform cardiovascular risk management.
Background:
The high prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors among the patients without cardiovascular disease (CVD) allows us to predict an increase in cardiovascular morbidity rate in the future. Arterial stiffness is one of the most important predictors and pathogenetic mechanisms of CVD development. The aim of our study was to evaluate the predictive differences of age-related and age-independent (universal) cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) reference values for detecting increased arterial stiffness in individuals without CVD.
Methods:
The study included 600 patients (43% men and 57% women, mean age 36.0 ± 18.3 years). All the patients underwent anthropometric measurements with obesity markers evaluation, assessment of arterial stiffness by sphygmomanometry. To create predictive models, we used universal and age-related CAVI thresholds: ≥ 9.0 (CAVI≥ 9) and CAVIAge according to the "Consensus of Russian experts on the evaluation of arterial stiffness in clinical practice".
Results:
In the < 50 years group, both the CAVIAge and CAVI≥ 9 models were significant (CAVIAge: b = 4.8, standard error b (st.err.b) = 0.27, P < 0.001; CAVI≥ 9: b = 3.2, st.err.b = 1.6, P < 0.001). The CAVIAge model demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity (> 70%) compared to the CAVI≥ 9 model (sensitivity 62%, specificity 58%). In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the CAVIAge model had a significantly higher area under the ROC curve (AUC) = 0.802 than the CAVI≥ 9 model: AUC = 0.674. In the ≥ 50 years group, both models were significant: CAVIAge (b = 2.6, st.err.b = 1.13, P < 0.001) and CAVI≥ 9 (b = 5.3, st.err.b = 0.94, P < 0.001). Both models demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity (> 70%). When ROC curves were analyzed for the CAVIAge model, the AUC value of 0.675 was significantly lower when compared to the CAVI≥ 9 model (AUC = 0.787, P = 0.031).
Conclusions:
In the < 50 years group, the model based on age-specific CAVI thresholds has the higher predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying individuals with increased arterial stiffness. In contrast, in the ≥ 50 years group, a predictive model using a universal threshold value of CAVI≥ 9 has advantages.
Related Concept Videos
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
Atherosclerosis II: Clinical manifestations and prevention
Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation

