Skip to main content
  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
      • Research Guidelines
        • Minimum Information About Microarray Data Experiments (MIAME)
      • Abstract
      • Acknowledgments
      • Clinical Implications (Only by invitation)
      • Conflict(s) of Interest/Disclosure(s) Statement
      • Figure Legends
      • Figures
      • Novelty and Significance: 1) What Is New, 2) What Is Relevant?
      • References
      • Sources of Funding
      • Tables
      • Text
      • Title Page
      • Online/Data Supplement
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
      • Change of Authorship Form
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Advanced search

Header Publisher Menu

  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

Hypertension

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
Editorial Commentaries

Concentric or Eccentric Hypertrophy: How Clinically Relevant Is the Difference?

Giovanni de Simone
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000121363.08252.a7
Hypertension. 2004;43:714-715
Originally published March 25, 2004
Giovanni de Simone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

Different combinations of volume and pressure overloads cause different left ventricular (LV) geometric adaptations. Whereas this cause-effect relationship is obvious for valve disease, because clear-cut types of overloads are easily recognizable, in systemic hypertension the type of cardiac load is less evident but at least as important for LV adaptation. Human arterial hypertension encompasses a large range of interactions between volume and pressure overloads, therefore producing a very large spectrum of possible LV adaptations. Based on the assumption that LV geometry is more useful than simple assessment of brachial blood pressure to identify the predominant type of overload, for convenience (and somewhat arbitrarily), we use generated cutoff points to define different LV geometric patterns according to the predominance of one hemodynamic load over the other one.1

When considering together the prevalence of concentric remodeling and concentric LV hypertrophy,1 we can easily conclude that pressure overload is the fundamental abnormality in arterial hypertension, although this is, in most circumstances, associated with some volume component. Thus, under chronic antihypertensive treatments that reduce pressure overload, a consistent reduction of concentric LV geometry can be expected when reduction of LV hypertrophy occurs.

Whether modifications of LV geometry from concentric to eccentric are beneficial beyond the reduction of LV mass has been debated; however, the conclusion has been, in general, that concentric LV hypertrophy is also characterized by greater LV mass than eccentric LV hypertrophy; therefore, these 2 features (ie, concentric geometry and LV hypertrophy) are so interrelated that they cannot to be easily discriminated.2,3 In contrast to this argument, in the presence of normal LV mass, Verdecchia et al4 demonstrated that concentric LV remodeling (ie, with normal LV mass) reflecting a nearly pure pressure overload1 was associated with poor prognosis. However, even in this study,4 although the measurements were in the range of arbitrarily defined normal LV mass, hypertensive patients with concentric LV remodeling exhibited higher values of LV mass than hypertensive patients with normal LV geometry, making it difficult to discriminate the type of LV geometry from the magnitude of LV mass.

Another argument of this issue is now proposed by Muiesan et al,5 who convincingly demonstrated that the normalization of the relation between chamber size and wall thickness has a favorable prognostic value that adds to the recognized positive effect of reducing LV mass. This finding stimulates 2 considerations.

In the Muiesan study,5 and in other studies on LV geometry and prognosis, LV hypertrophy has been assessed by traditional normalization of LV mass for body surface area, a method that increases the proportion of patients with concentric LV remodeling and apparently “normal LV mass,” caused by the exaggerating effect of body fat included in the computation of body surface area.6,7 Normalization for height2.76 reduces the proportion of overweight/obese subjects in the concentric LV remodeling cluster and increases the proportion of subjects with recognized concentric LV hypertrophy.8 Thus, the favorable change from concentric to normal (eccentric) LV geometry found by Muiesan et al5 probably included a number of patients initially classified in the group with concentric LV remodeling. These patients were not considered among those in whom regression of LV hypertrophy could have occurred because of their initial classification in the group without LV hypertrophy (by body surface area index). Thus, the effect of regression of LV concentric geometry independent of regression of LV hypertrophy could have been attenuated by using normalization for height2.7,6 which increases the proportion of individuals with concentric LV hypertrophy and reduces the prevalence of concentric LV remodeling.8

Even taking the potential body size adjustment limitations into account, the Muiesan study5 clearly indicates that when cardiovascular disease has not yet occurred, the natural prognostically adverse LV geometric pattern in hypertensive patients is concentric (ie, because of pressure overload). This finding is in line with an impressive series of experimental and clinical data.

Physiologically, there is little adaptive advantage in the concentric LV geometry. The perception that concentric LV geometry in pressure overload is a compensatory mechanism to reduce wall stress to maintain systolic performance should be probably revised, because LV function may be normally maintained even in the presence of elevated wall stress.9,10 A scenario alternative to the stress-correction theory is that cardiomyocyte hypertrophy and structural disarray are produced by pressure-overload neurohormonal activation, causing abnormal contractility and distensibility, which is at least partly compensated by increasing wall thickness, which preserves LV function at the chamber level.11 Although myocardial afterload is the prime stimulus that promotes the cascade of biological events leading to LV hypertrophy, reduction of wall stress induced by concentric hypertrophy would, therefore, be a consequence more than the final result of this adaptive mechanism. In humans, reduced wall stress, caused by concentric LV hypertrophy, is associated with increased cardiovascular risk.12 Moreover, an excessive prognostically adverse development of LV mass beyond the need to compensate for increased cardiac load is found when LV geometry is concentric.13,14

Structurally, pressure-overload LV hypertrophy is characterized by myocardial alterations at the sarcomeric and extracellular scaffold levels more than is observed in volume overload.15–17 When a volume component coexists with the predominant pressure overloads, as in most cases of arterial hypertension with concentric LV hypertrophy, the type of collagen accumulation and the consequent negative mechanical effect are similar to the pressure overload pattern.18

Thus, concentric LV geometry is the phenotypic condition associated with more severe hemodynamic and structural abnormalities and represents an unfavorable LV adaptation. This might be the rule in most cases of arterial hypertension when a direct ischemic myocardial insult has not yet occurred.

When progression of LV adaptation is associated with myocardial infarction, LV remodeling occurs and concentric geometry might disappear. Cross-sectionally, hypertensive patients with more eccentric LV geometry are more likely to have coronary artery disease than patients with concentric LV geometry.19 Thus, there is a high prevalence of concentric LV geometry during the natural progression of arterial hypertension toward cardiovascular disease, and a high prevalence of eccentric LV geometry once cardiovascular disease has occurred, as a consequence of postinfarction remodeling and impending systolic dysfunction.

Muiesan’s article5 demonstrates that concentric LV geometry is the predominant and most dangerous adaptive pattern in arterial hypertension before any cardiovascular event has occurred. Progression of the disease can revert to “normal” eccentric LV geometry when post-myocardial infarction remodeling occurs or as a consequence of efficacious antihypertensive therapy. Reverting to normal geometry by antihypertensive therapy reduces the risk of adverse outcome further than can be attributed to regression of LV hypertrophy. However, it remains to be established whether reversal to normal LV geometry can be obtained independently of reduction of LV mass.

Footnotes

  • The opinions expressed in this editorial are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Hearth Association.

References

  1. ↵
    Ganau A, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, de Simone G, Pickering TG, Saba PS, Vargiu P, Simongini I, Laragh JH. Patterns of left ventricular hypertrophy and geometric remodeling in essential hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 19: 1550–1558.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Gattobigio R, Zampi I, Santucci A, Santucci C, Reboldi G, Porcellati C. Prognostic value of left ventricular mass and geometry in systemic hypertension with left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol. 1996; 78: 197–202.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    Krumholz HM, Larson M, Levy D. Prognosis of left ventricular geometric patterns in the Framingham Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25: 879–884.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Battistelli M, Bartoccini C, Santucci A, Santucci C, Reboldi G, Porcellati C. Adverse prognostic significance of concentric remodeling of the left ventricle in hypertensive patients with normal left ventricular mass. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25: 871–878.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Monteduro C, Bonzi B, Paini A, Viola S, Poisa P, Rizzoni D, Castellano M, Agabiti-Rosei E. Left ventricular concentric geometry during treatment adversely affects cardiovascular prognosis in hypertensive patients. Hypertension. 2004; 43: 731–738.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    de Simone G, Daniels SR, Devereux RB, Meyer RA, Roman MJ, de Divitiis O, Alderman MH. Left ventricular mass and body size in normotensive children and adults: assessment of allometric relations and impact of overweight. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 20: 1251–1260.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Bella JN, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, O’Grady MJ, Welty TK, Lee ET, Fabsitz RR, Howard BV. Relations of left ventricular mass to fat-free and adipose body mass: the strong heart study. The Strong Heart Study Investigators. Circulation. 1998; 98: 2538–2544.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    de Simone G, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, Alderman MH, Laragh JH. Relation of obesity and gender to left ventricular hypertrophy in normotensive and hypertensive adults. Hypertension. 1994; 23: 600–606.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Hill JA, Karimi M, Kutschke W, Davisson RL, Zimmerman K, Wang Z, Kerber RE, Weiss RM. Cardiac hypertrophy is not a required compensatory response to short-term pressure overload. Circulation. 2000; 101: 2863–2869.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Esposito G, Rapacciuolo A, Naga Prasad SV, Takaoka H, Thomas SA, Koch WJ, Rockman HA. Genetic alterations that inhibit in vivo pressure-overload hypertrophy prevent cardiac dysfunction despite increased wall stress. Circulation. 2002; 105: 85–92.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    de Simone G, Devereux RB. Rationale of echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular wall stress and midwall mechanics in hypertensive heart disease. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2002; 3: 192–198.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Aurigemma GP, Devereux RB, de Simone G, Roman MJ, O’Grady MJ, Koren M, Alderman M, Laragh J. Myocardial function and geometry in hypertensive subjects with low levels of afterload. Am Heart J. 2002; 143: 546–551.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Mureddu GF, Pasanisi F, Palmieri V, Celentano A, Contaldo F, de Simone G. Appropriate or inappropriate left ventricular mass in the presence or absence of prognostically adverse left ventricular hypertrophy. J Hypertens. 2001; 19: 1113–1119.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    de Simone G, Verdecchia P, Pede S, Gorini M, Maggioni AP. Prognosis of inappropriate left ventricular mass in hypertension: the MAVI Study. Hypertension. 2002; 40: 470–476.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    Weber KT. Fibrosis and hypertensive heart disease. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2000; 15: 264–272.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Ross RS, Borg TK. Integrins and the myocardium. Circ Res. 2001; 88: 1112–1119.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Schmitt JP, Semsarian C, Arad M, Gannon J, Ahmad F, Duffy C, Lee RT, Seidman CE, Seidman JG. Consequences of pressure overload on sarcomere protein mutation-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 2003; 108: 1133–1138.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    Piper C, Schultheiss HP, Akdemir D, Rudolf J, Horstkotte D, Pauschinger M. Remodeling of the cardiac extracellular matrix differs between volume- and pressure-overloaded ventricles and is specific for each heart valve lesion. J Heart Valve Dis. 2003; 12: 592–600.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    Zabalgoitia M, Berning J, Koren MJ, Stoylen A, Nieminen MS, Dahlof B, Devereux RB. Impact of coronary artery disease on left ventricular systolic function and geometry in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (the LIFE study). Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88: 646–650.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Hypertension
April 2004, Volume 43, Issue 4
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    Concentric or Eccentric Hypertrophy: How Clinically Relevant Is the Difference?
    Giovanni de Simone
    Hypertension. 2004;43:714-715, originally published March 25, 2004
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000121363.08252.a7

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  • Article Alerts
    Log in to Email Alerts with your email address.
  • Save to my folders

Share this Article

  • Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Hypertension.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Concentric or Eccentric Hypertrophy: How Clinically Relevant Is the Difference?
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from Hypertension
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Hypertension web site.
  • Share on Social Media
    Concentric or Eccentric Hypertrophy: How Clinically Relevant Is the Difference?
    Giovanni de Simone
    Hypertension. 2004;43:714-715, originally published March 25, 2004
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000121363.08252.a7
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Epidemiology
  • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Echocardiography
  • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertrophy
    • Cardiomyopathy

Hypertension

  • About Hypertension
  • Instructions for Authors
  • AHA CME
  • Guidelines and Statements
  • Permissions
  • Journal Policies
  • Email Alerts
  • Open Access Information
  • AHA Journals RSS
  • AHA Newsroom

Editorial Office Address:
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231
email: hypertension@heart.org

Information for:
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Subscriber Help
  • Institutions / Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions FAQ
  • International Users
American Heart Association Learn and Live
National Center
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231

Customer Service

  • 1-800-AHA-USA-1
  • 1-800-242-8721
  • Local Info
  • Contact Us

About Us

Our mission is to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. That single purpose drives all we do. The need for our work is beyond question. Find Out More about the American Heart Association

  • Careers
  • SHOP
  • Latest Heart and Stroke News
  • AHA/ASA Media Newsroom

Our Sites

  • American Heart Association
  • American Stroke Association
  • For Professionals
  • More Sites

Take Action

  • Advocate
  • Donate
  • Planned Giving
  • Volunteer

Online Communities

  • AFib Support
  • Garden Community
  • Patient Support Network
  • Professional Online Network

Follow Us:

  • Follow Circulation on Twitter
  • Visit Circulation on Facebook
  • Follow Circulation on Google Plus
  • Follow Circulation on Instagram
  • Follow Circulation on Pinterest
  • Follow Circulation on YouTube
  • Rss Feeds
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright
  • Ethics Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Linking Policy
  • Diversity
  • Careers

©2018 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. The American Heart Association is a qualified 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
*Red Dress™ DHHS, Go Red™ AHA; National Wear Red Day ® is a registered trademark.

  • PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST National Health Council Standards of Excellence Certification Program
  • BBB Accredited Charity
  • Comodo Secured