Literature DB >> 25185130

Age-specific differences between conventional and ambulatory daytime blood pressure values.

David Conen1, Stefanie Aeschbacher1, Lutgarde Thijs1, Yan Li1, José Boggia1, Kei Asayama1, Tine W Hansen1, Masahiro Kikuya1, Kristina Björklund-Bodegård1, Takayoshi Ohkubo1, Jørgen Jeppesen1, Yu-Mei Gu1, Christian Torp-Pedersen1, Eamon Dolan1, Tatiana Kuznetsova1, Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek1, Valérie Tikhonoff1, Tobias Schoen1, Sofia Malyutina1, Edoardo Casiglia1, Yuri Nikitin1, Lars Lind1, Edgardo Sandoya1, Kalina Kawecka-Jaszcz1, Luis Mena1, Gladys E Maestre1, Jan Filipovský1, Yutaka Imai1, Eoin O'Brien1, Ji-Guang Wang1, Lorenz Risch1, Jan A Staessen1.   

Abstract

Mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure (BP) values are considered to be lower than conventional BP values, but data on this relation among younger individuals <50 years are scarce. Conventional and 24-hour ambulatory BP were measured in 9550 individuals not taking antihypertensive treatment from 13 population-based cohorts. We compared individual differences between daytime ambulatory and conventional BP according to 10-year age categories. Age-specific prevalences of white coat and masked hypertension were calculated. Among individuals aged 18 to 30, 30 to 40, and 40 to 50 years, mean daytime BP was significantly higher than the corresponding conventional BP (6.0, 5.2, and 4.7 mm Hg for systolic; 2.5, 2.7, and 1.7 mm Hg for diastolic BP; all P<0.0001). In individuals aged 60 to 70 and ≥70 years, conventional BP was significantly higher than daytime ambulatory BP (5.0 and 13.0 mm Hg for systolic; 2.0 and 4.2 mm Hg for diastolic BP; all P<0.0001).The prevalence of white coat hypertension exponentially increased from 2.2% to 19.5% from those aged 18 to 30 years to those aged ≥70 years, with little variation between men and women (8.0% versus 6.1%; P=0.0003). Masked hypertension was more prevalent among men (21.1% versus 11.4%; P<0.0001). The age-specific prevalences of masked hypertension were 18.2%, 27.3%, 27.8%, 20.1%, 13.6%, and 10.2% among men and 9.0%, 9.9%, 12.2%, 11.9%, 14.7%, and 12.1% among women. In conclusion, this large collaborative analysis showed that the relation between daytime ambulatory and conventional BP strongly varies by age. These findings may have implications for diagnosing hypertension and its subtypes in clinical practice.
© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  age group; ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; epidemiology; hypertension; lood pressure

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25185130     DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03957

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


  24 in total

1.  Prevalence and determinants of white coat effect in a large UK hypertension clinic population.

Authors:  O Thomas; K E Shipman; K Day; M Thomas; U Martin; I Dasgupta
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 3.012

2.  Short-term water deprivation does not increase blood pressure variability or impair neurovascular function in healthy young adults.

Authors:  Joseph C Watso; Austin T Robinson; Matthew C Babcock; Kamila U Migdal; Megan M Wenner; Sean D Stocker; William B Farquhar
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.619

3.  ABPM Induced Alarm Reaction: A Possible Cause of Overestimation of Daytime Blood Pressure Values Reduced By Treatment with Beta-Blockers.

Authors:  Francesco Salvo; Chiara Lonati; Monica Albano; Paolo Fogliacco; Andrea Riccardo Errani; Cinzia Vallo; Michele Berardi; Vito Meinero; Carlo Lorenzo Muzzulini; Alberto Morganti
Journal:  High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev       Date:  2016-06-06

4.  Relationship between office and home blood pressure with increasing age: The International Database of HOme blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDHOCO).

Authors:  Angeliki Ntineri; George S Stergiou; Lutgarde Thijs; Kei Asayama; José Boggia; Nadia Boubouchairopoulou; Atsushi Hozawa; Yutaka Imai; Jouni K Johansson; Antti M Jula; Anastasios Kollias; Leonella Luzardo; Teemu J Niiranen; Kyoko Nomura; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Ichiro Tsuji; Christophe Tzourio; Fang-Fei Wei; Jan A Staessen
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 3.872

5.  Clinic Blood Pressure Underestimates Ambulatory Blood Pressure in an Untreated Employer-Based US Population: Results From the Masked Hypertension Study.

Authors:  Joseph E Schwartz; Matthew M Burg; Daichi Shimbo; Joan E Broderick; Arthur A Stone; Joji Ishikawa; Richard Sloan; Tyla Yurgel; Steven Grossman; Thomas G Pickering
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 6.  Blood Pressure Assessment in Adults in Clinical Practice and Clinic-Based Research: JACC Scientific Expert Panel.

Authors:  Paul Muntner; Paula T Einhorn; William C Cushman; Paul K Whelton; Natalie A Bello; Paul E Drawz; Beverly B Green; Daniel W Jones; Stephen P Juraschek; Karen L Margolis; Edgar R Miller; Ann Marie Navar; Yechiam Ostchega; Michael K Rakotz; Bernard Rosner; Joseph E Schwartz; Daichi Shimbo; George S Stergiou; Raymond R Townsend; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright; Lawrence J Appel
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Target Organ Complications and Cardiovascular Events Associated With Masked Hypertension and White-Coat Hypertension: Analysis From the Dallas Heart Study.

Authors:  Danielle Tientcheu; Colby Ayers; Sandeep R Das; Darren K McGuire; James A de Lemos; Amit Khera; Norman Kaplan; Ronald Victor; Wanpen Vongpatanasin
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 8.  Dysregulated Blood Pressure: Can Regulating Emotions Help?

Authors:  Claudia Trudel-Fitzgerald; Paola Gilsanz; Murray A Mittleman; Laura D Kubzansky
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.369

9.  Blood pressure related to age: The India ABPM study.

Authors:  Upendra Kaul; Stefano Omboni; Priyadarshini Arambam; Srinivas Rao; Sunil Kapoor; Jitendra P S Swahney; Kamal Sharma; Tiny Nair; Manoj Chopda; Jagdish Hiremath; Chandrashekhar K Ponde; Abraham Oomman; Budanur C Srinivas; Viraj Suvarna; Sanjiv Jasuja; Eric Borges; Willem J Verberk
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.738

10.  Comparison among research, home, and office blood pressure measurements for pregnant women: The TMM BirThree Cohort Study.

Authors:  Takuma Usuzaki; Mami Ishikuro; Hirohito Metoki; Keiko Murakami; Aoi Noda; Fumihiko Ueno; Masahiro Kikuya; Taku Obara; Shinichi Kuriyama
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.