Cited by 135Cardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionCoffee research and impactsCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 39 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Smoking and caffeine have a synergistic detrimental effect on aortic stiffness and wave reflections

Open access

Abstract

Objectives We investigated the acute and chronic combined effect of cigarette smoking and caffeine intake on aortic stiffness and wave reflections.Background We have shown that smoking and caffeine separately increase arterial stiffness. Aortic stiffness and wave reflections are important determinants of the efficient performance of the cardiovascular system and prognosticators of cardiovascular risk.Methods The acute effects of smoking (one cigarette), caffeine (200 mg, equivalent to 2 cups of coffee), and smoking plus caffeine were studied in 24 healthy subjects according to a randomized, placebo- and sham procedure-controlled crossover design. The chronic effect of smoking and caffeine was studied in a population study that enrolled 160 healthy subjects.Results Acute study: there was a significant interaction between caffeine and smoking with regard to pulse-wave velocity (p < 0.01) and augmentation index (p < 0.05). When smoking followed caffeine intake, pulse-wave velocity and augmentation index increased further by 0.52 m/s and 13.4%, respectively, reaching a total of 0.85 m/s and 17.4%, 0.17 m/s and 9.2% in excess of the mere sum of caffeine effect (0.33 m/s and 4%) alone and smoking effect alone (0.35 m/s and 4.2%). Population study: there was a significant interaction of chronic coffee consumption and smoking regarding pulse-wave velocity (p < 0.05) and augmentation index (p = 0.001).Conclusions The present study shows, for the first time, that when smoking and caffeine intake are combined, they interact and exert a synergistic, unfavorable effect on aortic stiffness and wave reflections on both an acute and chronic basis.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In healthy adults, combined caffeine and smoking produced acute synergistic worsening of aortic stiffness and wave reflections beyond the sum of their individual effects. A chronic population study also found significant interactions between coffee drinking and smoking on pulse-wave velocity, augmentation index, augmented pressure, and subendocardial viability index.

Key findings

  • Acute study: significant caffeine–smoking interaction for pulse-wave velocity (p < 0.01) and heart-rate-corrected augmentation index (p < 0.05). When smoking followed caffeine, pulse-wave velocity increased further by 0.52 m/s to a total of 0.85 m/s, 0.17 m/s above the sum of caffeine alone (0.33 m/s) and smoking alone (0.35 m/s); augmentation index increased further by 13.4% to 17.4%, 9.2% above the sum of caffeine alone (4%) and smoking alone (4.2%).
  • Acute central pressures also showed significant interaction: smoking after caffeine increased central systolic, diastolic, and pulse pressures further by 7.5, 4.4, and 3.1 mm Hg, reaching peak increases of 16.4, 11.7, and 4.7 mm Hg, respectively. Ejection duration decreased further by 16.2 ms to −16.6 ms, 11.7 ms less than the sum of individual effects; subendocardial viability index interaction was p < 0.001.
  • Population study: among 160 subjects, chronic coffee consumption and smoking interacted significantly for pulse-wave velocity (p < 0.05), augmentation index (p = 0.001), augmented pressure (p < 0.005), and subendocardial viability index (p = 0.001). Table values showed pulse-wave velocity 6.36 m/s in coffee drinkers/smokers, 6.31 m/s in coffee drinkers/nonsmokers, and 5.80 m/s in neither (p = 0.05); augmentation index 22.7%, 21.7%, and 11.0% (p = 0.001); subendocardial viability index 145.0%, 140.8%, and 156.1% (p = 0.005).
  • No effect of gender was found on any of the significant interactions.

Methods

  • Acute study: randomized, placebo- and sham procedure-controlled crossover design in 24 healthy current smokers and regular caffeine consumers (>100 mg/day). Four sessions were smoking one standard cigarette (1.1 mg nicotine) over 5 min, sham smoking, caffeine 200 mg plus smoking 60 min later, and placebo plus sham smoking. Aortic stiffness was studied in 14 subjects (7 women, 7 men; age 30 ± 2 years) and wave reflections in 10 subjects (5 women, 5 men; age 33 ± 3 years).
  • Population study: 160 clinically healthy employees (79% participation rate) were grouped as 97 chronic smokers and coffee drinkers, 41 chronic coffee drinkers and nonsmokers, 2 chronic smokers but not coffee drinkers (data not shown), and 20 neither coffee consumers nor smokers. Measurements were taken in the morning after an overnight fast.
  • Main measures/analysis: carotid–femoral pulse-wave velocity (Complior) and augmentation index, augmented pressure, and subendocardial viability index (SphygmoCor). Multi-way analysis of covariance for repeated measurements was used, with adjustments for mean pressure, heart rate, age, and gender; Bonferroni correction was applied. Power calculation indicated 160 participants provided >0.80 power at p < 0.05.

Limitations

  • Stated: the study refers to young, apparently healthy adults, and results might not be directly extendable to other population groups. The basic mechanism responsible for the interactive effect is unclear.
  • Stated/evident: the population groups differed significantly in age (p = 0.001), although analyses were age-adjusted; the chronic population study is cross-sectional and cannot establish causality.
  • Evident: the acute study sample was small (24 total; 14 and 10 in the two measurement groups), and all acute participants were current smokers and regular caffeine consumers, limiting generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.07.049

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 39 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 20 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 9
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 11
18 of 18
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The observed associations between chronic smoking/coffee consumption and arterial stiffness are not due to unmeasured confounding.

    “The involvement of the interaction between chronic coffee intake and smoking on the investigated parameters was evaluated using multi-way analysis of covariance after adjusting for age and gender.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The acute effects of smoking and caffeine on arterial stiffness are not affected by carryover effects between the four study sessions.

    “Each subject was studied fasting on four separate days before and after 1) smoking one standard cigarette (1.1 mg nicotine) over 5 min, 2) sham smoking, 3) caffeine intake (200 mg, a dose equivalent to 2 cups of coffee) plus smoking one standard cigarette (1.1 mg nicotine) 60 min after caffeine intake, and 4) placebo (to caffeine) and sham smoking 60 min after placebo intake.”
2 of 2

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

  • Pulse pressure does not match systolic minus diastolic pressure in the smoking session

    Minor

    In Table 2's smoking session, peripheral systolic pressure minus diastolic pressure is 50.4 mm Hg, not the reported pulse pressure of 51.2 mm Hg.

    Reported 51.2 · recomputed 50.4

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 41 references

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Vlachopoulos, C., Kosmopoulou, F., Panagiotakos, D., Ioakeimidis, N., Alexopoulos, N., Pitsavos, C., & Stefanadis, C.
Affiliations
Hippocration General Hospital (GR)
Corresponding author
Vlachopoulos, Charalambos
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-11
Volume
44
Issue
9
Pages
1911-1917
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071910605
Cited by
135
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
7.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Keywords
cigarette smoking, caffeine, coffee consumption, aortic stiffness, arterial stiffness, wave reflection, pulse wave velocity, augmentation index, synergistic interaction, cardiovascular risk
MeSH terms
Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Aortic Diseases, Blood Flow Velocity, Blood Pressure, Caffeine, Drug Synergism, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Myocardial Contraction, Pulsatile Flow, Smoking, Statistics as Topic, Stroke Volume, Cross-Over Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review