OBJECTIVE: Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring and home blood pressure measurements predicted the presence of target organ damage and the risk of cardiovascular events better than did office blood pressure. METHODS: To compare these two methods in their correlation with organ damage, we consecutively included 325 treated (70%) or untreated hypertensives (125 women, mean age = 64.5 +/- 11.3) with office (three measurements at two consultations), home (three measurements morning and evening over 3 days) and 24-h ambulatory monitoring. Target organs were evaluated by ECG, echocardiography, carotid echography and detection of microalbuminuria. Data from 302 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean BP levels were 142/82 mmHg for office, 135.5/77 mmHg for home and 128/76 mmHg for 24-h monitoring (day = 130/78 mmHg; night = 118.5/67 mmHg). With a 135 mmHg cut-off, home and daytime blood pressure diverged in 20% of patients. Ambulatory and Home blood pressure were correlated with organ damage more closely than was office BP with a trend to better correlations with home BP. Using regression analysis, a 140 mmHg home systolic blood pressure corresponded to a 135 mmHg daytime systolic blood pressure; a 133 mmHg daytime ambulatory blood pressure and a 140 mmHg home blood pressure corresponded to the same organ damage cut-offs (Left ventricular mass index = 50 g/m, Cornell.QRS = 2440 mm/ms, carotid intima media thickness = 0.9 mm). Home-ambulatory differences were significantly associated with age and antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSION: We showed that home blood pressure was at least as well correlated with target organ damage, as was the ambulatory blood pressure. Home-ambulatory correlation and their correlation with organ damage argue in favor of different cut-offs, that are approximately 5 mmHg higher for systolic home blood pressure.
OBJECTIVE: Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring and home blood pressure measurements predicted the presence of target organ damage and the risk of cardiovascular events better than did office blood pressure. METHODS: To compare these two methods in their correlation with organ damage, we consecutively included 325 treated (70%) or untreated hypertensives (125 women, mean age = 64.5 +/- 11.3) with office (three measurements at two consultations), home (three measurements morning and evening over 3 days) and 24-h ambulatory monitoring. Target organs were evaluated by ECG, echocardiography, carotid echography and detection of microalbuminuria. Data from 302 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean BP levels were 142/82 mmHg for office, 135.5/77 mmHg for home and 128/76 mmHg for 24-h monitoring (day = 130/78 mmHg; night = 118.5/67 mmHg). With a 135 mmHg cut-off, home and daytime blood pressure diverged in 20% of patients. Ambulatory and Home blood pressure were correlated with organ damage more closely than was office BP with a trend to better correlations with home BP. Using regression analysis, a 140 mmHg home systolic blood pressure corresponded to a 135 mmHg daytime systolic blood pressure; a 133 mmHg daytime ambulatory blood pressure and a 140 mmHg home blood pressure corresponded to the same organ damage cut-offs (Left ventricular mass index = 50 g/m, Cornell.QRS = 2440 mm/ms, carotid intima media thickness = 0.9 mm). Home-ambulatory differences were significantly associated with age and antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSION: We showed that home blood pressure was at least as well correlated with target organ damage, as was the ambulatory blood pressure. Home-ambulatory correlation and their correlation with organ damage argue in favor of different cut-offs, that are approximately 5 mmHg higher for systolic home blood pressure.
Authors: P A Sarafidis; A A Lazaridis; K P Imprialos; P I Georgianos; K A Avranas; A D Protogerou; M N Doumas; V G Athyros; A I Karagiannis Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 3.012