Cardio‐ankle vascular index and cardiovascular disease: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective and cross‐sectional studies

• Published in: The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 16 - 24
• Main Authors: Matsushita, Kunihiro, Ding, Ning, Kim, Esther D., Budoff, Matthew, Chirinos, Julio A., Fernhall, Bo, Hamburg, Naomi M., Kario, Kazuomi, Miyoshi, Toru, Tanaka, Hirofumi, Townsend, Raymond
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley and Sons Inc 01.01.2019
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; all‐cause mortality; Aorta - diagnostic imaging; Aorta - physiology; arterial stiffness; Asia - epidemiology; Blood Pressure - physiology; Cardio Ankle Vascular Index - methods; cardiovascular disease; Cardiovascular Diseases - epidemiology; Cardiovascular Diseases - mortality; Cardiovascular Diseases - physiopathology; cardio‐ankle vascular index; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Hypertension and Cardiovascular Outcomes; Male; meta‐analysis; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Review Paper; Risk Factors; Vascular Stiffness - physiology; Asia; arterial stiffness; meta-analysis; cardiovascular disease; cardio-ankle vascular index; all-cause mortality
• ISSN: 1524-6175; 1751-7176
• DOI: 10.1111/jch.13425

The cardio‐ankle vascular index (CAVI) is a new measure of arterial stiffness that reflects the stiffness from the ascending aorta to the ankle arteries, and demonstrates little dependence on blood pressure during the evaluation. However, a comprehensive assessment of the association of CAVI with cardiovascular disease (CVD) has not been reported. We performed a systematic review to assess the association between CAVI and CVD. We searched for both prospective and cross‐sectional studies using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane from inception until April 11, 2017. We pooled the results using random‐effects models. Among 1519 records, we identified nine prospective studies (n = 5214) and 17 cross‐sectional eligible studies (n = 7309), with most enrolling high CVD risk populations in Asia. All nine prospective studies investigated composite CVD events as an outcome (498 cases including coronary events and stroke) but modeled CAVI inconsistently. The pooled adjusted hazard ratio for CVD events per 1 standard deviation increment of CAVI in four studies was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.05‐1.36, P = 0.006). Of the 17 cross‐sectional studies, 13 studies compared CAVI values between patients with and without CVD and all reported significantly higher values in those with CVD (pooled mean difference in CAVI values 1.28 [0.86‐1.70], P < 0.001). This systematic review suggests a modest association between CAVI and incident CVD risk, and highlights the need for studies assessing CAVI as a predictor of CVD in the general population and non‐Asian countries.