Literature DB >> 23071126

Within-subject blood pressure level--not variability--predicts fatal and nonfatal outcomes in a general population.

Rudolph Schutte1, Lutgarde Thijs, Yan-Ping Liu, Kei Asayama, Yu Jin, Augustine Odili, Yu-Mei Gu, Tatiana Kuznetsova, Lotte Jacobs, Jan A Staessen.   

Abstract

To assess the prognostic significance of blood pressure (BP) variability, we followed health outcomes in a family-based random population sample representative of the general population (n=2944; mean age: 44.9 years; 50.7% women). At baseline, BP was measured 5 times consecutively at each of 2 home visits 2 to 4 weeks apart. We assessed within-subject overall (10 readings), within- and between-visit systolic BP variability from variability independent of the mean, the difference between maximum and minimum BP, and average real variability. Over a median follow-up of 12 years, 401 deaths occurred and 311 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. Overall systolic BP variability averaged (SD) 5.45 (2.82) units, 15.87 (8.36) mmHg, and 4.08 (2.05) mmHg for variability independent of the mean, difference between maximum and minimum BP, and average real variability, respectively. Female sex, older age, higher-mean systolic BP, lower body mass index, a history of peripheral arterial disease, and use of β-blockers were the main correlates of systolic BP variability. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, overall and within- and between-visit BP variability did not predict total or cardiovascular mortality or the composite of any fatal plus nonfatal cardiovascular end point. For instance, the hazard ratios for all cardiovascular events combined in relation to overall variability independent of the mean, difference between maximum and minimum BP, and average real variability were 1.05 (0.96-1.15), 1.06 (0.96-1.16), and 1.08 (0.98-1.19), respectively. By contrast, mean systolic BP was a significant predictor of all end points under study, independent of BP variability. In conclusion, in an unbiased population sample, BP variability did not contribute to risk stratification over and beyond mean systolic BP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23071126      PMCID: PMC3607229          DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.202143

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hypertension        ISSN: 0194-911X            Impact factor:   10.190


  53 in total

1.  Prognostic significance of blood pressure and heart rate variabilities: the Ohasama study.

Authors:  M Kikuya; A Hozawa; T Ohokubo; I Tsuji; M Michimata; M Matsubara; M Ota; K Nagai; T Araki; H Satoh; S Ito; S Hisamichi; Y Imai
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 10.190

2.  Quality control of the blood pressure phenotype in the European Project on Genes in Hypertension.

Authors:  Tatiana Kuznetsova; Jan A Staessen; Kalina Kawecka-Jaszcz; Speranta Babeanu; Edoardo Casiglia; Jan Filipovsky; Choudomir Nachev; Yuri Nikitin; Jan Peleskã; Eoin O'Brien
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.444

3.  Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 19.112

4.  Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Björn Dahlöf; Peter S Sever; Neil R Poulter; Hans Wedel; D Gareth Beevers; Mark Caulfield; Rory Collins; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Arni Kristinsson; Gordon T McInnes; Jesper Mehlsen; Markku Nieminen; Eoin O'Brien; Jan Ostergren
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Sep 10-16       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Blood pressure and risk of stroke in patients with cerebrovascular disease. The United Kingdom Transient Ischaemic Attack Collaborative Group.

Authors:  A Rodgers; S MacMahon; G Gamble; J Slattery; P Sandercock; C Warlow
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-07-20

6.  Analysis by categorizing or dichotomizing continuous variables is inadvisable: an example from the natural history of unruptured aneurysms.

Authors:  O Naggara; J Raymond; F Guilbert; D Roy; A Weill; D G Altman
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 7.  Limitations of the usual blood-pressure hypothesis and importance of variability, instability, and episodic hypertension.

Authors:  Peter M Rothwell
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2010-03-13       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  High remaining risk in poorly treated hypertension: the 'rule of halves' still exists.

Authors:  Lars Weinehall; Bengt Ohgren; Mats Persson; Birgitta Stegmayr; Kurt Boman; Göran Hallmans; Lars H Lindholm
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.844

9.  Is "usual" blood pressure a proxy for 24-h ambulatory blood pressure in predicting cardiovascular outcomes?

Authors:  Jerzy Gasowski; Yan Li; Tatiana Kuznetsova; Tom Richart; Lutgarde Thijs; Tomasz Grodzicki; Robert Clarke; Jan A Staessen
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2008-07-03       Impact factor: 2.689

10.  Familial aggregation of blood pressure, anthropometric characteristics and urinary excretion of sodium and potassium--a population study in two Belgian towns.

Authors:  J Staessen; C J Bulpitt; R Fagard; J V Joossens; P Lijnen; A Amery
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1985
View more
  42 in total

Review 1.  Is It Daily, Monthly, or Yearly Blood Pressure Variability that Enhances Cardiovascular Risk?

Authors:  Eamon Dolan; Eoin O'Brien
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Regional Fat Distribution and Blood Pressure Level and Variability: The Dallas Heart Study.

Authors:  Yuichiro Yano; Wanpen Vongpatanasin; Colby Ayers; Aslan Turer; Alvin Chandra; Mercedes R Carnethon; Philip Greenland; James A de Lemos; Ian J Neeland
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 10.190

3.  Visit-to-visit Systolic Blood Pressure Variability and Stroke Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Han Wang; Min Li; Shu-Hua Xie; Ye-Tong Oyang; Min Yin; Bing Bao; Zhi-Ying Chen; Xiao-Ping Yin
Journal:  Curr Med Sci       Date:  2019-10-14

4.  Relationship between Within-Visit Blood Pressure Variability and Skeletal Muscle Mass.

Authors:  K-I Kim; M-G Kang; S-J Yoon; J-Y Choi; S-W Kim; C-H Kim
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 4.075

Review 5.  Does blood pressure variability contribute to risk stratification? Methodological issues and a review of outcome studies based on home blood pressure.

Authors:  Kei Asayama; Fang-Fei Wei; Yan-Ping Liu; Azusa Hara; Yu-Mei Gu; Rudolph Schutte; Yan Li; Lutgarde Thijs; Jan A Staessen
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 3.872

Review 6.  Blood pressure variability: assessment, predictive value, and potential as a therapeutic target.

Authors:  Gianfranco Parati; Juan Eugenio Ochoa; Carolina Lombardi; Grzegorz Bilo
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 5.369

7.  The effects of increasing calcium channel blocker dose vs. adding a diuretic to treatment regimens for patients with uncontrolled hypertension.

Authors:  Shigemasa Tani; Kei Asayama; Koji Oiwa; Shinsuke Harasawa; Katsuaki Okubo; Atsuhiko Takahashi; Ayumi Tanabe; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Atsushi Hirayama; Toshio Kushiro
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.872

8.  Short-term variability and nocturnal decline in ambulatory blood pressure in normotension, white-coat hypertension, masked hypertension and sustained hypertension: a population-based study of older individuals in Spain.

Authors:  Teresa Gijón-Conde; Auxiliadora Graciani; Esther López-García; Pilar Guallar-Castillón; Esther García-Esquinas; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo; José R Banegas
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.872

Review 9.  Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability.

Authors:  Gianfranco Parati; Juan E Ochoa; Carolina Lombardi; Grzegorz Bilo
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 10.  Cardiovascular risk stratification and blood pressure variability on ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement.

Authors:  José Boggia; Kei Asayama; Yan Li; Tine Willum Hansen; Luis Mena; Rudolph Schutte
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.369

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.