additional information compared to peripheral blood pressure, the aim of this study was to asses indices of central and peripheral pressure for prediction of cardiovascular events over a relatively shorter mean follow-up period of approximately two years. Method: The longitudinal study cohort consisted of 668 patients (age 61 ± 9 years, 425 Objective: Prediction of haemodynamic parameters for cardiovascular events is conventionally assessed in follow-up studies of approximately five years or more. Since central aortic pressure may have stronger association with cardiac and cerebral function and may provide males, mean follow-up period 25 ± 3.9 months) was drawn from an initial cohort of 850 inpatients with primary hypertension. Noninvasive measuremenst were obtained for carotid– femoral pulse wave velocity, central aortic and brachial pressure, augmentation index (AIx), and pressure (AP) (SphygmoCor) and intima-media thickness (IMT). Results: After adjusting for confounding factors, central systolic (cSP) and pulse pressure (cPP) showed higher hazard ratios (HR/10 mm) for cardiovascular events compared to peripheral pressure indices (pSP, pPP) at age >60 years (cSP: HR = 1.18, pSP: HR = 1.17, p = 0.034; cPP: HR = 1.28 pPP, HR = 1.2 p = 0.019), each SD increase in IMT and in AP entailed a 1.4 times higher risk of increased total events in older patients. For males, each SD increase in AP was associated with 1.36 times higher risk of increased total events. However, for females each SD decrease in central aortic AIx and AP was associated with 0.4 and 0.5 times lower risk of increased total and major cardiovascular events, respectively. This sex difference is most likely due to lack of age-related increase of AIx in females after age >60 years compared to males. Conclusion: Central pressure improved prediction of CV events compared to peripheral pressure during a relatively short-term follow-up approximatey 2 years at age 60 >years.