Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33750902›Full record

ReviewJournal of human hypertension2021

Physiological and clinical insights from reservoir-excess pressure analysis.

Matthew K Armstrong, Martin G Schultz, Alun D Hughes, Dean S Picone, James E Sharman

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of human hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew K ArmstrongMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3948-2452
Martin G SchultzMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Alun D HughesMRC Unit for Lifelong Health & Aging, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5432-5271
Dean S PiconeMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4760-1634
James E SharmanMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. James.Sharman@utas.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2792-0811
University of Tasmania · AUMRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation CS/13/1/30327British Heart Foundation CS/15/6/31468British Heart Foundation IG/18/5/33958British Heart Foundation PG/13/6/29934British Heart Foundation PG/15/75/31748British Heart Foundation PG/17/90/33415Department of HealthMedical Research Council MC_UU_12019/1Medical Research Council MR/P023444/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a growing body of evidence indicating that reservoir-excess pressure model parameters provide physiological and clinical insights above and beyond standard blood pressure (BP) and pulse waveform analysis. This information has never been collectively examined and was the aim of this review. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, with BP as the greatest cardiovascular disease risk factor. However, brachial systolic and diastolic BP provide limited information on the underlying BP waveform, missing important BP-related cardiovascular risk. A comprehensive analysis of the BP waveform is provided by parameters derived via the reservoir-excess pressure model, which include reservoir pressure, excess pressure, and systolic and diastolic rate constants and Pinfinity. These parameters, derived from the arterial BP waveform, provide information on the underlying arterial physiology and ventricular-arterial interactions otherwise missed by conventional BP and waveform indices. Application of the reservoir-excess pressure model in the clinical setting may facilitate a better understanding and earlier identification of cardiovascular dysfunction associated with disease. Indeed, reservoir-excess pressure parameters have been associated with sub-clinical markers of end-organ damage, cardiac and vascular dysfunction, and future cardiovascular events and mortality beyond conventional risk factors. In the future, greater understanding is needed on how the underlying physiology of the reservoir-excess pressure parameters informs cardiovascular disease risk prediction over conventional BP and waveform indices. Additional consideration should be given to the application of the reservoir-excess pressure model in clinical practice using new technologies embedded into conventional BP assessment methods.

Indexed as

Brachial ArteryCardiovascular DiseasesBlood PressureHumansRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID33750902
PMCPMC7611663
OpenAlexW3133544113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.