Literature DB >> 30535368

Reconsidering the cut-off diastolic blood pressure for predicting cardiovascular events: a nationwide population-based study from Korea.

You-Jung Choi1,2, Sun-Hwa Kim1, Si-Hyuck Kang1,2, Chang-Hwan Yoon1,2, Hae-Young Lee2,3, Tae-Jin Youn1,2, In-Ho Chae1,2, Cheol-Ho Kim1,2.   

Abstract

AIMS: It is unclear whether a J-curve association exists in cardiovascular risk prediction and how independently systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) predict cardiovascular outcomes. This study evaluated the association of systolic and diastolic BP with major cardiovascular events to clarify these issues. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Antihypertensive medication-naïve subjects with available BP measurements and no history of cardiovascular events were extracted from the National Health Insurance Services Health Screening Cohort. The study endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure. The study population comprised 290 600 subjects (median follow-up duration 6.7 years). The risk for major cardiovascular events was lowest at systolic and diastolic BPs of 90-99 mmHg and 40-49 mmHg, respectively, above which BPs demonstrated a log-linear risk prediction. Systolic and diastolic BPs were highly correlated. The risk prediction of diastolic BP was inconsistent when stratified by systolic BP. A wider pulse pressure rather than a higher diastolic BP was significantly associated with cardiovascular outcomes among men aged ≥55 years. In addition, the difference between diastolic BPs of <80 mmHg and 80-89 mmHg mostly disappeared after statistical adjustment or stratification.
CONCLUSION: Elevated BP is a strong predictor of future cardiovascular events including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure. This study showed that the log-linear relationship between BP and cardiovascular events extended down to a BP of ≥90/40 mmHg. Although hypertension is defined using a lower systolic BP cut-off of ≥130 mmHg, the diastolic BP component of ≥80 mmHg seems disproportionately low. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood pressure; Cardiovascular disease; Guidelines; Hypertension

Year:  2019        PMID: 30535368     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy801

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  16 in total

1.  Isolated Diastolic Hypertension in the UK Biobank: Comparison of ACC/AHA and ESC/NICE Guideline Definitions.

Authors:  John W McEvoy; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Brian P McGrath; Prosenjit Kundu; Natalie Daya; Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 10.190

2.  2022 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology and the Taiwan Hypertension Society for the Management of Hypertension.

Authors:  Tzung-Dau Wang; Chern-En Chiang; Ting-Hsing Chao; Hao-Min Cheng; Yen-Wen Wu; Yih-Jer Wu; Yen-Hung Lin; Michael Yu-Chih Chen; Kwo-Chang Ueng; Wei-Ting Chang; Ying-Hsiang Lee; Yu-Chen Wang; Pao-Hsien Chu; Tzu-Fan Chao; Hsien-Li Kao; Charles Jia-Yin Hou; Tsung-Hsien Lin
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 1.800

3.  Association of Isolated Diastolic Hypertension as Defined by the 2017 ACC/AHA Blood Pressure Guideline With Incident Cardiovascular Outcomes.

Authors:  John W McEvoy; Natalie Daya; Faisal Rahman; Ron C Hoogeveen; Roger S Blumenthal; Amil M Shah; Christie M Ballantyne; Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The contribution of the systolic and diastolic components for the diagnosis of arterial hypertension under the 2017 ACC/AHA Guideline and metabolic heterogeneity among individuals with Stage 1 hypertension.

Authors:  Fernando H Y Cesena; Fernando C Nary; Raul D Santos; Marcio S Bittencourt
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  Did the 2017 ACC/AHA blood pressure guideline get it wrong in reducing the diastolic threshold to define hypertension from 90 to 80 mmHg?

Authors:  Brian P McGrath; John W McEvoy
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 3.738

Review 6.  New findings bearing on the prevention, detection and management of high blood pressure.

Authors:  Robert M Carey; Paul K Whelton
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.108

Review 7.  Cardiovascular Research Using the Korean National Health Information Database.

Authors:  Eue Keun Choi
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 3.243

8.  Differences in prevalence of hypertension subtypes according to the 2018 Korean Society of Hypertension and 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines: The Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007-2017 (KNHANES IV-VII).

Authors:  So Mi Jemma Cho; Hokyou Lee; Hyeon Chang Kim
Journal:  Clin Hypertens       Date:  2019-12-01

9.  A cohort study and meta-analysis of isolated diastolic hypertension: searching for a threshold to guide treatment.

Authors:  Alan P Jacobsen; Mahmoud Al Rifai; Kelly Arps; Seamus P Whelton; Matthew J Budoff; Khurram Nasir; Michael J Blaha; Bruce M Psaty; Roger S Blumenthal; Wendy S Post; John W McEvoy
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 35.855

10.  Short-term effects of air pollution on blood pressure.

Authors:  You-Jung Choi; Sun-Hwa Kim; Si-Hyuck Kang; Sun-Young Kim; Ok-Jin Kim; Chang-Hwan Yoon; Hae-Young Lee; Tae-Jin Youn; In-Ho Chae; Cheol-Ho Kim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.