Literature DB >> 33342236

Associations Between Systolic Interarm Differences in Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes and Mortality: Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis, Development and Validation of a Prognostic Algorithm: The INTERPRESS-IPD Collaboration.

Christopher E Clark1, Fiona C Warren1, Kate Boddy2, Sinead T J McDonagh1, Sarah F Moore1, John Goddard2, Nigel Reed2, Malcolm Turner2, Maria Teresa Alzamora3, Rafel Ramos Blanes4, Shao-Yuan Chuang5, Michael Criqui6, Marie Dahl7,8, Gunnar Engström9, Raimund Erbel10, Mark Espeland11, Luigi Ferrucci12, Maëlenn Guerchet13, Andrew Hattersley14, Carlos Lahoz15, Robyn L McClelland16, Mary M McDermott17, Jackie Price18, Henri E Stoffers19, Ji-Guang Wang20, Jan Westerink21, James White22, Lyne Cloutier23, Rod S Taylor1,24, Angela C Shore25, Richard J McManus26, Victor Aboyans27, John L Campbell1.   

Abstract

Systolic interarm differences in blood pressure have been associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease. We undertook individual participant data meta-analyses to (1) quantify independent associations of systolic interarm difference with mortality and cardiovascular events; (2) develop and validate prognostic models incorporating interarm difference, and (3) determine whether interarm difference remains associated with risk after adjustment for common cardiovascular risk scores. We searched for studies recording bilateral blood pressure and outcomes, established agreements with collaborating authors, and created a single international dataset: the Inter-arm Blood Pressure Difference - Individual Participant Data (INTERPRESS-IPD) Collaboration. Data were merged from 24 studies (53 827 participants). Systolic interarm difference was associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: continuous hazard ratios 1.05 (95% CI, 1.02-1.08) and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.02-1.11), respectively, per 5 mm Hg systolic interarm difference. Hazard ratios for all-cause mortality increased with interarm difference magnitude from a ≥5 mm Hg threshold (hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.01-1.14]). Systolic interarm differences per 5 mm Hg were associated with cardiovascular events in people without preexisting disease, after adjustment for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.08]), Framingham (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.01-1.08]), or QRISK cardiovascular disease risk algorithm version 2 (QRISK2) (hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.06-1.18]) cardiovascular risk scores. Our findings confirm that systolic interarm difference is associated with increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and cardiovascular events. Blood pressure should be measured in both arms during cardiovascular assessment. A systolic interarm difference of 10 mm Hg is proposed as the upper limit of normal. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42015031227.

Entities:  

Keywords:  blood pressure; cardiovascular disease; meta-analysis; mortality; risk

Year:  2020        PMID: 33342236      PMCID: PMC7803446          DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.15997

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


  93 in total

1.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Association of a difference in systolic blood pressure between arms with vascular disease and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Rod S Taylor; Angela C Shore; Obioha C Ukoumunne; John L Campbell
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Trends in the diagnosis and management of hypertension: repeated primary care survey in South West England.

Authors:  Natasha Mejzner; Christopher E Clark; Lindsay Fp Smith; John L Campbell
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Predictive value of ankle-brachial index and blood glucose on the outcomes of six-year all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality in a Chinese population of type 2 diabetes patients.

Authors:  Y Wang; Q Mou; D Zhao; Y Xu; D Hu; H Ma; J Liu; X Guo; J Li
Journal:  Int Angiol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.789

5.  Cardiovascular morbidity-mortality associated to ankle-brachial index in the general population.

Authors:  C Lahoz; M Barrionuevo; T García-Fernández; I Vicente; M F García-Iglesias; J M Mostaza
Journal:  Rev Clin Esp (Barc)       Date:  2013-10-09

6.  Associations Between Ankle-Brachial Index and Cognitive Function: Results From the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Trial.

Authors:  Mark A Espeland; Anne B Newman; Kaycee Sink; Thomas M Gill; Abby C King; Michael E Miller; Jack Guralnik; Jeff Katula; Timothy Church; Todd Manini; Kieran F Reid; Mary M McDermott
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 4.669

7.  Microalbuminuria and peripheral arterial disease are independent predictors of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, especially among hypertensive subjects: five-year follow-up of the Hoorn Study.

Authors:  A Jager; P J Kostense; H G Ruhé; R J Heine; G Nijpels; J M Dekker; L M Bouter; C D Stehouwer
Journal:  Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 8.311

8.  General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80%.

Authors:  N J Wald; M R Law
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-06-28

10.  The difference in blood pressure readings between arms and survival: primary care cohort study.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Rod S Taylor; Angela C Shore; John L Campbell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-03-20
View more
  8 in total

1.  Inter-arm systolic blood pressure difference: non-persistence and association with incident cardiovascular disease in the Multi-ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Daniel A Duprez; David R Jacobs; Leah I B Andrews; Lyndia C Brumback; Julie O Denenberg; Robyn L Mcclelland; Isac C Thomas; Michael H Criqui; Matthew A Allison
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 2.877

Review 2.  How Should We Measure and Deal with Office Blood Pressure in 2021?

Authors:  Annina S Vischer; Thilo Burkard
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-03

3.  Inter-arm blood pressure difference, when is it a useful risk marker for cardiovascular events?

Authors:  Christopher E Clark
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2021-11-06       Impact factor: 2.877

4.  Clinical relevance of double-arm blood pressure measurement and prevalence of clinically important inter-arm blood pressure differences in Indian primary care.

Authors:  Gurpreet S Wander; Sinead T J McDonagh; M Srinivasa Rao; R Alagesan; J C Mohan; Ajit Bhagwat; A K Pancholia; M Viswanathan; Manoj Bhavrilal Chopda; A Purnanand; P L N Kapardhi; Arun R Vadavi; R Selvaraj; Pankaj Aneja; Suhas Hardas; Neil Bordoloi; N Sivakadaksham; Nilesh Goswami; Christopher E Clark; Willem J Verberk
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2022-07-10       Impact factor: 2.885

5.  Inter-arm difference in systolic blood pressure: Prevalence and associated factors in an African population.

Authors:  Gwladys Nadia Gbaguidi; Audrey Kaboure; Yessito Corine Houehanou; Salimanou Ariyo Amidou; Dismand Stephan Houinato; Victor Aboyans; Philippe Lacroix
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 3.752

6.  Clinical Validation of the Impact of Branch Stent Extension on Hemodynamics in ISF-TEVAR Involving LSA Reconstruction.

Authors:  Jiateng Hu; Fengshi Li; Peng Qiu; Xiaoyu Wu; Hongji Pu; Zhen Zhao; Jinbao Qin; Guang Liu; Shanliang Jin; Xinwu Lu; Xiaobing Liu
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-06-13

7.  Simultaneously measured inter-arm blood pressure difference is not associated with pulse wave velocity in a clinical dataset of at-risk hypertensive patients.

Authors:  Janis M Nolde; Leslie Marisol Lugo-Gavidia; Dennis Kannenkeril; Justine Chan; Sandi Robinson; Ancy Jose; Anu Joyson; Luca Schlaich; Revathy Carnagarin; Omar Azzam; Márcio Galindo Kiuchi; Markus P Schlaich
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 2.877

8.  Elevated Interarm Systolic Blood Pressure Difference Is Positively Associated with Increased Likelihood of Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors:  Min Li; Fangfang Fan; Yan Zhang; Wei Ma; Yong Huo
Journal:  Int J Hypertens       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 2.420

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.