Elizabeth S Muxfeldt1, Gil F Salles. 1. Hypertension Program, University Hospital Clementino Fraga Filho, Medical School, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. bethmux@globo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) reduction and ambulatory pulse pressure (PP) are well known prognostic markers obtained from ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). The aim of this study is to investigate which one of these ABPM parameters is related to high cardiovascular risk profile in resistant hypertension, based on their associations with target organ damage (TOD). METHODS: Clinical-demographic, laboratory and ABPM variables were recorded in a cross-sectional study involving 907 resistant hypertensive patients. Nocturnal systolic BP reduction and 24-h PP were assessed both as continuous and dichotomized variables (PP at the upper tertile value: 63 mmHg). Statistical analyses included bivariate tests and multivariate logistic regression with each TOD as the dependent variable. RESULTS: Patients with the nondipping pattern and high 24-h PP shared some characteristics: they were older, had higher prevalence of cerebrovascular disease and nephropathy, higher office and 24-h BP levels, increased serum creatinine and microalbuminuria, and higher left ventricular mass index than their counterparts. Additionally, patients with high PP had a greater prevalence of diabetes and other TOD. In multivariate logistic regression, high PP was independently associated with all TODs even after adjustment for sex, age, BMI, cardiovascular risk factors, 24-h mean arterial pressure and antihypertensive treatment, whereas nondipping pattern was only associated with hypertensive nephropathy. Furthermore, PP was more strongly associated with the number of TOD than the nocturnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) fall. CONCLUSIONS: In a large group of resistant hypertensive patients, an increased 24-h PP shows a closer correlation with high cardiovascular risk profile than the nocturnal BP reduction.
OBJECTIVE: Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) reduction and ambulatory pulse pressure (PP) are well known prognostic markers obtained from ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). The aim of this study is to investigate which one of these ABPM parameters is related to high cardiovascular risk profile in resistant hypertension, based on their associations with target organ damage (TOD). METHODS: Clinical-demographic, laboratory and ABPM variables were recorded in a cross-sectional study involving 907 resistant hypertensivepatients. Nocturnal systolic BP reduction and 24-h PP were assessed both as continuous and dichotomized variables (PP at the upper tertile value: 63 mmHg). Statistical analyses included bivariate tests and multivariate logistic regression with each TOD as the dependent variable. RESULTS:Patients with the nondipping pattern and high 24-h PP shared some characteristics: they were older, had higher prevalence of cerebrovascular disease and nephropathy, higher office and 24-h BP levels, increased serum creatinine and microalbuminuria, and higher left ventricular mass index than their counterparts. Additionally, patients with high PP had a greater prevalence of diabetes and other TOD. In multivariate logistic regression, high PP was independently associated with all TODs even after adjustment for sex, age, BMI, cardiovascular risk factors, 24-h mean arterial pressure and antihypertensive treatment, whereas nondipping pattern was only associated with hypertensive nephropathy. Furthermore, PP was more strongly associated with the number of TOD than the nocturnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) fall. CONCLUSIONS: In a large group of resistant hypertensivepatients, an increased 24-h PP shows a closer correlation with high cardiovascular risk profile than the nocturnal BP reduction.
Authors: Ramón C Hermida; Diana E Ayala; María T Ríos; José R Fernández; Artemio Mojón; Michael H Smolensky Journal: Curr Hypertens Rep Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 5.369
Authors: Lin-Bo Fan; James A Blumenthal; Alan L Hinderliter; Andrew Sherwood Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 5.024
Authors: Andrew Sherwood; Julie K Bower; Faye S Routledge; James A Blumenthal; Judith A McFetridge-Durdle; L Kristin Newby; Alan L Hinderliter Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2012-07-12 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Juan Carlos Yugar-Toledo; Heitor Moreno Júnior; Miguel Gus; Guido Bernardo Aranha Rosito; Luiz César Nazário Scala; Elizabeth Silaid Muxfeldt; Alexandre Alessi; Andrea Araújo Brandão; Osni Moreira Filho; Audes Diógenes de Magalhães Feitosa; Oswaldo Passarelli Júnior; Dilma do Socorro Moraes de Souza; Celso Amodeo; Weimar Kunz Sebba Barroso; Marco Antônio Mota Gomes; Annelise Machado Gomes de Paiva; Eduardo Costa Duarte Barbosa; Roberto Dischinger Miranda; José Fernando Vilela-Martin; Wilson Nadruz Júnior; Cibele Isaac Saad Rodrigues; Luciano Ferreira Drager; Luiz Aparecido Bortolotto; Fernanda Marciano Consolim-Colombo; Márcio Gonçalves de Sousa; Flávio Antonio de Oliveira Borelli; Sérgio Emanuel Kaiser; Gil Fernando Salles; Maria de Fátima de Azevedo; Lucélia Batista Neves Cunha Magalhães; Rui Manoel Dos Santos Póvoa; Marcus Vinícius Bolívar Malachias; Armando da Rocha Nogueira; Paulo César Brandão Veiga Jardim; Thiago de Souza Veiga Jardim Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Christian Ott; Melvin D Lobo; Paul A Sobotka; Felix Mahfoud; Alice Stanton; John Cockcroft; Neil Sulke; Eamon Dolan; Markus van der Giet; Joachim Hoyer; Stephen S Furniss; John P Foran; Adam Witkowski; Andrzej Januszewicz; Danny Schoors; Konstantinos Tsioufis; Benno J Rensing; Manish Saxena; Benjamin Scott; G André Ng; Stephan Achenbach; Roland E Schmieder Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 5.501