Eamon Dolan

Prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure, and episodic hypertension

BACKGROUND The mechanisms by which hypertension causes vascular events are unclear. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment focus only on underlying mean blood pressure. We aimed to reliably establish the prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure, maximum blood pressure reached, untreated episodic hypertension, and residual variability in treated patients. METHODS We determined the risk of stroke in relation to visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure (expressed as standard deviation [SD] and parameters independent of mean blood pressure) and maximum blood pressure in patients with previous transient ischaemic attack (TIA; UK-TIA trial and three validation cohorts) and in patients with treated hypertension (Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Blood Pressure Lowering Arm [ASCOT-BPLA]). In ASCOT-BPLA, 24-h ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring (ABPM) was also studied. FINDINGS In each TIA cohort, visit-to-visit variability in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was a strong predictor of subsequent stroke (eg, top-decile hazard ratio [HR] for SD SBP over seven visits in UK-TIA trial: 6.22, 95% CI 4.16-9.29, p<0.0001), independent of mean SBP, but dependent on precision of measurement (top-decile HR over ten visits: 12.08, 7.40-19.72, p<0.0001). Maximum SBP reached was also a strong predictor of stroke (HR for top-decile over seven visits: 15.01, 6.56-34.38, p<0.0001, after adjustment for mean SBP). In ASCOT-BPLA, residual visit-to-visit variability in SBP on treatment was also a strong predictor of stroke and coronary events (eg, top-decile HR for stroke: 3.25, 2.32-4.54, p<0.0001), independent of mean SBP in clinic or on ABPM. Variability on ABPM was a weaker predictor, but all measures of variability were most predictive in younger patients and at lower (<median) values of mean SBP in every cohort. INTERPRETATION Visit-to-visit variability in SBP and maximum SBP are strong predictors of stroke, independent of mean SBP. Increased residual variability in SBP in patients with treated hypertension is associated with a high risk of vascular events. FUNDING None.

Superiority of ambulatory over clinic blood pressure measurement in predicting mortality: the Dublin outcome study.

The purpose of this study was to determine if ambulatory blood pressure measurement predicted total and cardiovascular mortality over and beyond clinic blood pressure measurement and other cardiovascular risk factors; 5292 untreated hypertensive patients referred to a single blood pressure clinic who had clinic and ambulatory blood pressure measurement at baseline were followed up in a prospective study of mortality outcome. Multiple Cox regression was used to model time to total and cause-specific mortality for ambulatory blood pressure measurement while adjusting for clinic blood pressure measurement and other risk factors at baseline. There were 646 deaths (of which 389 were cardiovascular) during a median follow-up period of 8.4 years. With adjustment for gender, age, risk indices, and clinic blood pressure, higher mean values of ambulatory blood pressure were independent predictors for cardiovascular mortality. The relative hazard ratio for each 10-mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure was 1.12 (1.06 to 1.18; P<0.001) for daytime and 1.21 (1.15 to 1.27; P<0.001) for nighttime systolic blood pressure. The hazard ratios for each 5-mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure were 1.02 (0.99 to 1.07; P=NS) for daytime and 1.09 (1.04 to 1.13; P<0.01) for nighttime diastolic pressures. The hazard ratios for nighttime ambulatory blood pressure remained significant after adjustment for daytime ambulatory blood pressure. These results have 2 important clinical messages: ambulatory measurement of blood pressure is superior to clinic measurement in predicting cardiovascular mortality, and nighttime blood pressure is the most potent predictor of outcome.

European Society of Hypertension Position Paper on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM.This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost-effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements.At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM.The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised.The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.

Effects of β blockers and calcium-channel blockers on within-individual variability in blood pressure and risk of stroke

BACKGROUND Analyses of some randomised trials show that calcium-channel blockers reduce the risk of stroke more than expected on the basis of mean blood pressure alone and that beta blockers are less effective than expected. We aimed to investigate whether the effects of these drugs on variability in blood pressure might explain these disparities in effect on stroke risk. METHODS The Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA) compared amlodipine-based regimens with atenolol-based regimens in 19 257 patients with hypertension and other vascular risk factors and the Medical Research Council (MRC) trial compared atenolol-based and diuretic-based regimens versus placebo in 4396 hypertensive patients aged 65-74 years. We expressed visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure during follow-up in the two trials as standard deviation (SD) and as transformations uncorrelated with mean blood pressure. For ASCOT-BPLA, we also studied within-visit variability and variability on 24 h ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring (ABPM). RESULTS In ASCOT-BPLA, group systolic blood pressure (SBP) SD was lower in the amlodipine group than in the atenolol group at all follow-up visits (p<0.0001), mainly because of lower within-individual visit-to-visit variability. Within-visit and ABPM variability in SBP were also lower in the amlodipine group than in the atenolol group (all p<0.0001). Analysis of changes from baseline showed that variability decreased over time in the amlodipine group and increased in the atenolol group. The lower risk of stroke in the amlodipine group (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.90) was partly attenuated by adjusting for mean SBP during follow-up (0.84, 0.72-0.98), but was abolished by also adjusting for within-individual SD of clinic SBP (0.99, 0.85-1.16). Findings were similar for coronary events. In the ABPM substudy, reduced variability in daytime SBP in the amlodipine group (p<0.0001) partly accounted for the reduced risk of vascular events, but reduced visit-to-visit variability in clinic SBP had a greater effect. In the MRC trial, group SD SBP and all measures of within-individual visit-to-visit variability in SBP were increased in the atenolol group compared with both the placebo group and the diuretic group during initial follow-up (all p<0.0001). Subsequent temporal trends in variability in blood pressure during follow-up in the atenolol group correlated with trends in stroke risk. INTERPRETATION The opposite effects of calcium-channel blockers and beta blockers on variability of blood pressure account for the disparity in observed effects on risk of stroke and expected effects based on mean blood pressure. To prevent stroke most effectively, blood-pressure-lowering drugs should reduce mean blood pressure without increasing variability; ideally they should reduce both.

Ambulatory Arterial Stiffness Index as a Predictor of Cardiovascular Mortality in the Dublin Outcome Study

We hypothesized that the dynamic relation between diastolic and systolic blood pressure over 24 hours provides a measure of arterial stiffness and might, therefore, predict cardiovascular mortality over and above pulse pressure. At baseline, while not on antihypertensive medication, 11 291 patients (mean age, 54.6 years; 5965 women) underwent ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Using all of the blood pressure readings, we plotted diastolic against systolic blood pressure from each individual and calculated the regression slope. The ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) was defined as 1 minus this regression slope. Over a median follow-up of 5.3 years, 566 cardiovascular deaths occurred, including 151 from stroke and 358 from cardiac disorders. Before and after adjustment for other cardiovascular risk factors, AASI and pulse pressure significantly predicted total cardiovascular mortality. AASI was a stronger predictor than pulse pressure for stroke (mutually adjusted relative hazard ratios for 1 SD increase, 1.21 versus 1.04; P=0.02 versus 0.66) with the opposite trend for cardiac mortality (relative hazard ratios, 1.03 versus 1.21; P=0.63 versus 0.002). In subjects with normal daytime ambulatory blood pressure (<135/<85 mm Hg), AASI was more predictive than pulse pressure of cardiovascular mortality (1.26 versus 0.96; P=0.04 versus 0.70) and of stroke mortality (1.81 versus 1.12; P=0.007 versus 0.58), whereas neither independently predicted cardiac mortality (1.11 versus 0.89; P=0.47 versus 0.40). AASI is a novel measure of arterial stiffness, which can be readily determined from ambulatory blood pressure recordings and which independently predicts cardiovascular mortality, even in normotensive subjects.

Ambulatory Arterial Stiffness Index Derived From 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

We hypothesized that 1 minus the slope of diastolic on systolic pressure during 24-hour ambulatory monitoring (ambulatory arterial stiffness index [AASI]) might reflect arterial stiffness. We compared AASI with established measures of arterial stiffness and studied its distribution in Chinese and European populations. We used 90207 SpaceLabs monitors and the SphygmoCor device to measure AASI, central and peripheral pulse pressures, the central (CAIx) and peripheral (PAIx) systolic augmentation indexes, and aortic pulse wave velocity. In 166 volunteers, the correlation coefficient between AASI and pulse wave velocity was 0.51 (P<0.0001). In 348 randomly recruited Chinese subjects, AASI correlated (P<0.0001) with CAIx (r=0.48), PAIx (r=0.50), and central pulse pressure (r=0.50). AASI increased with age and mean arterial pressure but decreased with body height. Both before and after adjustment for arterial wave reflections by considering height and heart rate as covariates, AASI correlated more (P<0.0001) closely with CAIx and PAIx than 24-hour pulse pressure. Among normotensive subjects, the 95th percentile of AASI was 0.55 in Chinese and 0.57 in 1617 Europeans enrolled in the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring. The upper boundary of the 95% prediction interval of AASI in relation to age ranged from 0.53 at 20 years to 0.72 at 80 years. In conclusion, AASI is a new index of arterial stiffness that can be easily measured under ambulatory conditions. Pending additional validation in outcome studies, normal values of AASI are probably <0.50 and 0.70 in young and older subjects, respectively.

Prognostic Value of Reading-to-Reading Blood Pressure Variability Over 24 Hours in 8938 Subjects From 11 Populations

In previous studies, of which several were underpowered, the relation between cardiovascular outcome and blood pressure (BP) variability was inconsistent. We followed health outcomes in 8938 subjects (mean age: 53.0 years; 46.8% women) randomly recruited from 11 populations. At baseline, we assessed BP variability from the SD and average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings. We computed standardized hazard ratios (HRs) while stratifying by cohort and adjusting for 24-hour BP and other risk factors. Over 11.3 years (median), 1242 deaths (487 cardiovascular) occurred, and 1049, 577, 421, and 457 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular, cardiac, or coronary event or a stroke. Higher diastolic average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted (P≤0.03) total (HR: 1.14) and cardiovascular (HR: 1.21) mortality and all types of fatal combined with nonfatal end points (HR: ≥1.07) with the exception of cardiac and coronary events (HR: ≤1.02; P≥0.58). Higher systolic average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted (P<0.05) total (HR: 1.11) and cardiovascular (HR: 1.16) mortality and all fatal combined with nonfatal end points (HR: ≥1.07), with the exception of cardiac and coronary events (HR: ≤1.03; P≥0.54). SD predicted only total and cardiovascular mortality. While accounting for the 24-hour BP level, average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings added <1% to the prediction of a cardiovascular event. Sensitivity analyses considering ethnicity, sex, age, previous cardiovascular disease, antihypertensive treatment, number of BP readings per recording, or the night:day BP ratio were confirmatory. In conclusion, in a large population cohort, which provided sufficient statistical power, BP variability assessed from 24-hour ambulatory recordings did not contribute much to risk stratification over and beyond 24-hour BP.

European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

Given the increasing use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in both clinical practice and hypertension research, a group of scientists, participating in the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability, in year 2013 published a comprehensive position paper dealing with all aspects of the technique, based on the available scientific evidence for ABPM. The present work represents an updated schematic summary of the most important aspects related to the use of ABPM in daily practice, and is aimed at providing recommendations for proper use of this technique in a clinical setting by both specialists and practicing physicians. The present article details the requirements and the methodological issues to be addressed for using ABPM in clinical practice, The clinical indications for ABPM suggested by the available studies, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension, are outlined in detail, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is discussed. The role of ABPM in pharmacological, epidemiological, and clinical research is also briefly mentioned. Finally, the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the situation of different countries with regard to the reimbursement and the availability of ABPM in primary care practices, hospital clinics, and pharmacies.

Prognostic value of isolated nocturnal hypertension on ambulatory measurement in 8711 individuals from 10 populations

Background We and other investigators previously reported that isolated nocturnal hypertension on ambulatory measurement (INH) clustered with cardiovascular risk factors and was associated with intermediate target organ damage. We investigated whether INH might also predict hard cardiovascular endpoints. Methods and results We monitored blood pressure (BP) throughout the day and followed health outcomes in 8711 individuals randomly recruited from 10 populations (mean age 54.8 years, 47.0% women). Of these, 577 untreated individuals had INH (daytime BP <135/85 mmHg and night-time BP ≥120/70 mmHg) and 994 untreated individuals had isolated daytime hypertension on ambulatory measurement (IDH; daytime BP ≥135/85 mmHg and night-time BP <120/70 mmHg). During follow-up (median 10.7 years), 1284 deaths (501 cardiovascular) occurred and 1109 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, compared with normotension (n = 3837), INH was associated with a higher risk of total mortality (hazard ratio 1.29, P = 0.045) and all cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.38, P = 0.037). IDH was associated with increases in all cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.46, P = 0.0019) and cardiac endpoints (hazard ratio 1.53, P = 0.0061). Of 577 patients with INH, 457 were normotensive (<140/90 mmHg) on office BP measurement. Hazard ratios associated with INH with additional adjustment for office BP were 1.31 (P = 0.039) and 1.38 (P = 0.044) for total mortality and all cardiovascular events, respectively. After exclusion of patients with office hypertension, these hazard ratios were 1.17 (P = 0.31) and 1.48 (P = 0.034). Conclusion INH predicts cardiovascular outcome in patients who are normotensive on office or on ambulatory daytime BP measurement.

Significance of White-Coat Hypertension in Older Persons With Isolated Systolic Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis Using the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes Population

The significance of white-coat hypertension in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension remains poorly understood. We analyzed subjects from the population-based 11-country International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes database who had daytime ambulatory blood pressure (BP; ABP) and conventional BP (CBP) measurements. After excluding persons with diastolic hypertension by CBP (≥90 mm Hg) or by daytime ABP (≥85 mm Hg), a history of cardiovascular disease, and persons <18 years of age, the present analysis totaled 7295 persons, of whom 1593 had isolated systolic hypertension. During a median follow-up of 10.6 years, there was a total of 655 fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. The analyses were stratified by treatment status. In untreated subjects, those with white-coat hypertension (CBP ≥140/<90 mm Hg and ABP <135/<85 mm Hg) and subjects with normal BP (CBP <140/<90 mm Hg and ABP <135/<85 mm Hg) were at similar risk (adjusted hazard rate: 1.17 [95% CI: 0.87–1.57]; P=0.29). Furthermore, in treated subjects with isolated systolic hypertension, the cardiovascular risk was similar in elevated conventional and normal daytime systolic BP as compared with those with normal conventional and normal daytime BPs (adjusted hazard rate: 1.10 [95% CI: 0.79–1.53]; P=0.57). However, both treated isolated systolic hypertension subjects with white-coat hypertension (adjusted hazard rate: 2.00; [95% CI: 1.43–2.79]; P<0.0001) and treated subjects with normal BP (adjusted hazard rate: 1.98 [95% CI: 1.49–2.62]; P<0.0001) were at higher risk as compared with untreated normotensive subjects. In conclusion, subjects with sustained hypertension who have their ABP normalized on antihypertensive therapy but with residual white-coat effect by CBP measurement have an entity that we have termed, “treated normalized hypertension.” Therefore, one should be cautious in applying the term “white-coat hypertension” to persons receiving antihypertensive treatment.