BackgroundThere is a close relationship between blood pressure levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, strokes, and kidney disease. For many years, the gold standard instrument for blood pressure measurement was a mercury sphygmomanometer and a stethoscope, but this century-old technique of Riva-Rocci/Korotkov is being progressively removed from clinical practice. Central blood pressure is considered better than peripheral blood pressure in predicting cardiovascular events, as it assesses wave reflections and viscoelastic properties of the arterial wall which make systolic and pulse pressures vary from central to peripheral arteries, but mean blood pressure is constant in the conduit arteries.MethodsThe study included 201 patients with primary hypertension (108 patients with chronic kidney disease and 93 patients without kidney disease). All patients underwent blood pressure measurement by OMRON M2 and Mobil-O-Graph devices, kidney function assessment and abdominal ultrasonography.ResultsPatients with chronic kidney disease were significantly older (60.02 ± 9.1 vs. 55.33 ± 8.5; P < 0.001), with longer duration of hypertension (7.56 ± 5.9 vs. 6.05 ± 5.8; P = 0.020) in comparison to those without chronic kidney disease. Automated peripheral measurement of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and pulse pressure were significantly higher in comparison to central blood pressure. Patients with chronic kidney disease had significantly higher augmentation index (24.06 ± 12.6 vs. 19.02 ± 10.8; P < 0.001) and pulsed wave velocity (8.66 ± 1.5 vs. 8.69 ± 6.8; P = 0.004) in comparison to those without chronic kidney disease. Augmentation index had positive correlation with pulse wave velocity (r = 0.183, P = 0.005). There was negative correlation between both pulse wave velocity and augmentation index and estimated glomerular filtration rate (r = -0.318, P < 0.001), and (r = -0.236, P < 0.001), respectively. Hence, arterial stiffness parameters are good positive test for prediction of chronic kidney disease.ConclusionThere is a strong agreement between non-invasive centrally and automated peripherally measured blood pressure in diagnosis of hypertension. But non-invasive central measurements are preferred over automated measurements for early prediction and detection of renal impairment.