Melissa G Y Lee1, Jonathan P Mynard2, Taryn L Luitingh1, Amanda M Walker3, Michael M H Cheung4, Igor E Konstantinov1, Christian P Brizard1, Gavin W Lambert5, Yves d'Udekem6. 1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Heart Research, Clinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. 2. Heart Research, Clinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. 3. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Department of Nephrology, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. 4. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Heart Research, Clinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Department of Cardiology, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. 5. Iverson Health Innovation Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. 6. Department of Cardiac Surgery, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Heart Research, Clinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. Electronic address: yves.dudekem@rch.org.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Twenty-four-hour (24-hr) ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is often considered the gold standard to detect hypertension. We aimed to determine the short-term progression of 24-hour blood pressure after coarctation repair and to compare ABPM between two different devices. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study using 24-hour ABPM (Oscar 2) in 47 patients aged 16-48 years with previous paediatric coarctation repair and not on antihypertensive medication. Results were compared to a previous ABPM using paired analyses. A subset (10/47, 21%) had an additional previous ABPM performed using a Spacelabs device. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 27±6 years after repair, hypertension and prehypertension on Oscar 2 ABPM was present in 57% (27/47) and 11% (5/47), respectively. Mean follow-up time between Oscar 2 ABPMs was 3.9±1.4 years, and between first Oscar 2 and Spacelabs and between Spacelabs and second Oscar 2 ABPM was 1.4±0.8 and 1.8±0.3 years, respectively. There was no difference in the proportion of hypertensive patients between Oscar 2 ABPMs (55% [26/47] vs. 57% [27/47], p=1.0) but 17 patients (17/47, 36%) had a reclassification of 24-hour ABPM status. Mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure was higher in both Oscar 2 ABPMs compared to Spacelabs (142.4±11.7 vs. 120.4±11.8mmHg, p=0.0001; and 137.4±12.2 vs. 120.4±11.8mmHg, p=0.0001; respectively). CONCLUSION: There was high intra-device reproducibility of 24-hour ABPM results using an Oscar 2 device but poor inter-device reproducibility in patients with repaired coarctation. Device-specific reference values may be required to ensure reliable 24-hour ABPM interpretation.
BACKGROUND: Twenty-four-hour (24-hr) ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is often considered the gold standard to detect hypertension. We aimed to determine the short-term progression of 24-hour blood pressure after coarctation repair and to compare ABPM between two different devices. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study using 24-hour ABPM (Oscar 2) in 47 patients aged 16-48 years with previous paediatric coarctation repair and not on antihypertensive medication. Results were compared to a previous ABPM using paired analyses. A subset (10/47, 21%) had an additional previous ABPM performed using a Spacelabs device. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 27±6 years after repair, hypertension and prehypertension on Oscar 2 ABPM was present in 57% (27/47) and 11% (5/47), respectively. Mean follow-up time between Oscar 2 ABPMs was 3.9±1.4 years, and between first Oscar 2 and Spacelabs and between Spacelabs and second Oscar 2 ABPM was 1.4±0.8 and 1.8±0.3 years, respectively. There was no difference in the proportion of hypertensivepatients between Oscar 2 ABPMs (55% [26/47] vs. 57% [27/47], p=1.0) but 17 patients (17/47, 36%) had a reclassification of 24-hour ABPM status. Mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure was higher in both Oscar 2 ABPMs compared to Spacelabs (142.4±11.7 vs. 120.4±11.8mmHg, p=0.0001; and 137.4±12.2 vs. 120.4±11.8mmHg, p=0.0001; respectively). CONCLUSION: There was high intra-device reproducibility of 24-hour ABPM results using an Oscar 2 device but poor inter-device reproducibility in patients with repaired coarctation. Device-specific reference values may be required to ensure reliable 24-hour ABPM interpretation.