Seryan Atasoy1,2, Hamimatunnisa Johar1,3, Annette Peters1,4, Karl-Heinz Ladwig1,4,5. 1. Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, Neuherberg, Germany. 2. Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitüt München, Marchioninistr. 15, München, Germany. 3. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Gießen and Marburg, Baldingerstraße, Marburg, Germany. 4. Deutsches Zentrum für Herz-Kreislauf-Forschung (DZHK), Partnersite Munich, Biedersteiner Straße 29, München,, Germany. 5. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Langerstraße 3, München, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate the clinical value of a lower blood pressure (BP) cut-off for Stage 1 (S1) hypertension (130-139 mmHg systolic or 80-89 mmHg diastolic) in comparison to the currently established Stage 2 (S2) cut-off (≥140/90 mmHg) in a population-based cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the hypertension prevalence and associated cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in a sample of 11 603 participants (52% men, 48% women; mean 47.6 years) from the MONICA/KORA prospective study. The implementation of the new S1 cut-off increased the prevalence of hypertension from 34% to 63%. Only 24% of S2 hypertension patients were under treatment. Within a follow-up period of 10 years (70 148 person-years), 370 fatal CVD events were observed. The adjusted CVD-specific mortality rate per 1000 persons was 1.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-2.25] cases in S2 and 1.07 (95% CI 0.71-1.64) cases in S1 hypertension in comparison to normal BP. Cox proportional regression models were significant for the association of S2 and CVD mortality (1.54, 95% CI 1.04-2.28, P = 0.03), also in the presence of competing risks (1.47, P = 0.05). However, statistical significance for S1 hypertension was not reached (0.93, 95% CI 0.61-1.44, P = 0.76). Among S2 participants, there was a significantly higher prevalence of depressed-mood in treated patients (47%) in comparison to non-treated patients (33%) (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The lower BP cut-off substantially increased hypertension prevalence, while capturing a population with lower CVD mortality. Additionally, participants under treatment were more likely to have depressed-mood in comparison to non-treated participants, which might reflect a negative labelling effect. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: To investigate the clinical value of a lower blood pressure (BP) cut-off for Stage 1 (S1) hypertension (130-139 mmHg systolic or 80-89 mmHg diastolic) in comparison to the currently established Stage 2 (S2) cut-off (≥140/90 mmHg) in a population-based cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the hypertension prevalence and associated cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in a sample of 11 603 participants (52% men, 48% women; mean 47.6 years) from the MONICA/KORA prospective study. The implementation of the new S1 cut-off increased the prevalence of hypertension from 34% to 63%. Only 24% of S2 hypertensionpatients were under treatment. Within a follow-up period of 10 years (70 148 person-years), 370 fatal CVD events were observed. The adjusted CVD-specific mortality rate per 1000 persons was 1.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-2.25] cases in S2 and 1.07 (95% CI 0.71-1.64) cases in S1 hypertension in comparison to normal BP. Cox proportional regression models were significant for the association of S2 and CVD mortality (1.54, 95% CI 1.04-2.28, P = 0.03), also in the presence of competing risks (1.47, P = 0.05). However, statistical significance for S1 hypertension was not reached (0.93, 95% CI 0.61-1.44, P = 0.76). Among S2 participants, there was a significantly higher prevalence of depressed-mood in treated patients (47%) in comparison to non-treated patients (33%) (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The lower BP cut-off substantially increased hypertension prevalence, while capturing a population with lower CVD mortality. Additionally, participants under treatment were more likely to have depressed-mood in comparison to non-treated participants, which might reflect a negative labelling effect. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.