Procolo Di Bonito1, Giuliana Valerio2, Lucia Pacifico3, Claudio Chiesa4, Cecilia Invitti5, Anita Morandi6, Maria Rosaria Licenziati7, Melania Manco8, Emanuele Miraglia Del Giudice9, Marco Giorgio Baroni10, Sandro Loche11, Gianluca Tornese12, Francesca Franco13, Claudio Maffeis14, Giovanni de Simone15. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, 'S. Maria delle Grazie', Pozzuoli Hospital. 2. Department of Movement Sciences and Wellbeing, University of Naples Parthenope, Naples. 3. Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome. 4. Institute of Translational Pharmacology, National Research Council, Rome. 5. IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Department of Medical Sciences & Rehabilitation, Milan. 6. Pediatric Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Unit, University Hospital of Verona, Verona. 7. Department of Pediatrics, AORN Santobono-Pausilipon, Naples. 8. IRCCS Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Rome. 9. Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Naples. 10. Department of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome. 11. Pediatric Endocrine Unit, Pediatric hospital for microcitemia, AO Brotzu, Cagliari. 12. Institute for maternal and child health IRCCS 'Burlo Garofolo', Trieste. 13. Pediatric Unit, AOU Udine, Udine. 14. Pediatric Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Unit, University of Verona, Verona. 15. Hypertension Research Center & Department of Translational Medical Sciences, Federico II University Naples, Naples, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the impact of the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines 2016 (ESHG2016) and the American Academy of Pediatrics Guidelines 2017 (AAPG2017) on the screening of hypertension and classification of abnormal left ventricular geometry (ALVG) in overweight/obese youth. METHODS: This study included 6137 overweight/obese youth; 437 had echocardiographic assessment. Hypertension was defined using either ESHG2016 or AAPG2017. ALVG was defined using 95th percentile for age and sex of left ventricular mass index (LVMi) and/or relative wall thickness (RWT) more than 0.38 (juvenile cut-offs) according to ESHG2016 or LVMi more than 51 g/h and/or RWT more than 0.42 (adult cut-offs) according to AAPG2017. RESULTS: Prevalence of youth at a high risk of hypertension was 13% higher using AAPG2017 than ESHG2016. The increase was larger in overweight youth at least 13 years of age (+43%). Using the juvenile cut-offs for ALVG, youth at a high risk of hypertension by ESHG2016 had an odds ratio [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] of 3.03 (1.31-7.05) for left ventricular concentric remodelling (LVcr) and 2.53 (1.43-4.47) for concentric left ventricular hypertrophy (cLVH) as compared with youth with normal LVG. Similarly, in youth at a high risk of hypertension by AAPG2017, the odds ratio for LVcr was 3.28 (1.45-7.41, P < 0.001) and 3.02 (95% CI: 1.73-5.27, P < 0.001) for cLVH. Using the adult cut-offs, no significant difference in ALVG was found with both guidelines. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of overweight/obese youth at a high risk of hypertension increased by 13% comparing AAPG2017 vs. ESHG2016. The juvenile cut-offs for ALVG were more effective than the adult criteria in intercepting individuals with a potentially higher cardiovascular risk.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the impact of the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines 2016 (ESHG2016) and the American Academy of Pediatrics Guidelines 2017 (AAPG2017) on the screening of hypertension and classification of abnormal left ventricular geometry (ALVG) in overweight/obese youth. METHODS: This study included 6137 overweight/obese youth; 437 had echocardiographic assessment. Hypertension was defined using either ESHG2016 or AAPG2017. ALVG was defined using 95th percentile for age and sex of left ventricular mass index (LVMi) and/or relative wall thickness (RWT) more than 0.38 (juvenile cut-offs) according to ESHG2016 or LVMi more than 51 g/h and/or RWT more than 0.42 (adult cut-offs) according to AAPG2017. RESULTS: Prevalence of youth at a high risk of hypertension was 13% higher using AAPG2017 than ESHG2016. The increase was larger in overweight youth at least 13 years of age (+43%). Using the juvenile cut-offs for ALVG, youth at a high risk of hypertension by ESHG2016 had an odds ratio [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] of 3.03 (1.31-7.05) for left ventricular concentric remodelling (LVcr) and 2.53 (1.43-4.47) for concentric left ventricular hypertrophy (cLVH) as compared with youth with normal LVG. Similarly, in youth at a high risk of hypertension by AAPG2017, the odds ratio for LVcr was 3.28 (1.45-7.41, P < 0.001) and 3.02 (95% CI: 1.73-5.27, P < 0.001) for cLVH. Using the adult cut-offs, no significant difference in ALVG was found with both guidelines. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of overweight/obese youth at a high risk of hypertension increased by 13% comparing AAPG2017 vs. ESHG2016. The juvenile cut-offs for ALVG were more effective than the adult criteria in intercepting individuals with a potentially higher cardiovascular risk.