Edgardo Sandoya

Prognostic accuracy of day versus night ambulatory blood pressure: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND Few studies have formally compared the predictive value of the blood pressure at night over and beyond the daytime value. We investigated the prognostic significance of the ambulatory blood pressure during night and day and of the night-to-day blood pressure ratio. METHODS We did 24-h blood pressure monitoring in 7458 people (mean age 56.8 years [SD 13.9]) enrolled in prospective population studies in Denmark, Belgium, Japan, Sweden, Uruguay, and China. We calculated multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios for daytime and night-time blood pressure and the systolic night-to-day ratio, while adjusting for cohort and cardiovascular risk factors. FINDINGS Median follow-up was 9.6 years (5th to 95th percentile 2.5-13.7). Adjusted for daytime blood pressure, night-time blood pressure predicted total (n=983; p<0.0001), cardiovascular (n=387; p<0.01), and non-cardiovascular (n=560; p<0.001) mortality. Conversely, adjusted for night-time blood pressure, daytime blood pressure predicted only non-cardiovascular mortality (p<0.05), with lower blood pressure levels being associated with increased risk. Both daytime and night-time blood pressure consistently predicted all cardiovascular events (n=943; p<0.05) and stroke (n=420; p<0.01). Adjusted for night-time blood pressure, daytime blood pressure lost prognostic significance only for cardiac events (n=525; p> or =0.07). Adjusted for the 24-h blood pressure, night-to-day ratio predicted mortality, but not fatal combined with non-fatal events. Antihypertensive drug treatment removed the significant association between cardiovascular events and the daytime blood pressure. Participants with systolic night-to-day ratio value of 1 or more were older, at higher risk of death, and died at an older age than those whose night-to-day ratio was normal (> or =0.80 to <0.90). INTERPRETATION In contrast to commonly held views, daytime blood pressure adjusted for night-time blood pressure predicts fatal combined with non-fatal cardiovascular events, except in treated patients, in whom antihypertensive drugs might reduce blood pressure during the day, but not at night. The increased mortality in patients with higher night-time than daytime blood pressure probably indicates reverse causality. Our findings support recording the ambulatory blood pressure during the whole day.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure

Abstract—Previous studies have reported results on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) in Europe and Japan, but no data exists from South America. In this study, we conducted a population surve...

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.

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.

Prognostic Value of the Morning Blood Pressure Surge in 5645 Subjects From 8 Populations

Previous studies on the prognostic significance of the morning blood pressure surge (MS) produced inconsistent results. Using the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome, we analyzed 5645 subjects (mean age: 53.0 years; 54.0% women) randomly recruited in 8 countries. The sleep-through and the preawakening MS were the differences in the morning blood pressure with the lowest nighttime blood pressure and the preawakening blood pressure, respectively. We computed multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios comparing the risk in ethnic- and sex-specific deciles of the MS relative to the average risk in the whole study population. During follow-up (median: 11.4 years), 785 deaths and 611 fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events occurred. While accounting for covariables and the night:day ratio of systolic pressure, the hazard ratio of all-cause mortality was 1.32 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.59; P=0.004) in the top decile of the systolic sleep-through MS (≥37.0 mm Hg). For cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death, these hazard ratios were 1.18 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.61; P=0.30) and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.11 to 1.80; P=0.005). For all cardiovascular, cardiac, coronary, and cerebrovascular events, the hazard ratios in the top decile of the systolic sleep-through MS were 1.30 (95% CI: 1.06 to 1.60; P=0.01), 1.52 (95% CI: 1.15 to 2.00; P=0.004), 1.45 (95% CI: 1.04 to 2.03; P=0.03), and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.68 to 1.32; P=0.74), respectively. Analysis of the preawakening systolic MS and the diastolic MS generated consistent results. In conclusion, a MS above the 90th percentile significantly and independently predicted cardiovascular outcome and might contribute to risk stratification by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

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.

The International Database of Ambulatory Blood Pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDACO): protocol and research perspectives.

ObjectivesThe International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (1993–1994) lacked a prospective dimension. We are constructing a new resource of longitudinal population studies to investigate with great precision to what extent the ambulatory blood pressure improves risk stratification. MethodsThe acronym IDACO refers to the new International Database of Ambulatory blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome. Eligible studies are population based, have fatal as well as nonfatal outcomes available for analysis, comply with ethical standards, and have been previously published in peer-reviewed journals. In a meta-analysis based on individual patient data, composite and cause-specific cardiovascular events will be related to various indexes derived by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The analyses will be stratified by cohort and adjusted for the conventional blood pressure and other cardiovascular risk factors. ResultsTo date, the international database includes 7609 patients from four cohorts recruited in Copenhagen, Denmark (n=2311), Noorderkempen, Belgium (n=2542), Ohasama, Japan (n=1535), and Uppsala, Sweden (n=1221). In these four cohorts, during a total of 69 295 person-years of follow-up (median 9.3 years), 1026 patients died and 929 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. Follow-up in five other eligible cohorts, involving a total of 4027 participants, is still in progress. We expect that this follow-up will be completed by the end of 2007. ConclusionThe international database of ambulatory blood pressure in relation to cardiovascular outcome will provide a shared resource to investigate risk stratification by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to an extent not possible in any earlier individual study.

Masked Hypertension in Diabetes Mellitus: Treatment Implications for Clinical Practice

Although distinguishing features of masked hypertension in diabetics are well known, the significance of antihypertensive treatment on clinical practice decisions has not been fully explored. We analyzed 9691 subjects from the population-based 11-country International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes. Prevalence of masked hypertension in untreated normotensive participants was higher ( P <0.0001) among 229 diabetics (29.3%, n=67) than among 5486 nondiabetics (18.8%, n=1031). Over a median of 11.0 years of follow-up, the adjusted risk for a composite cardiovascular end point in untreated diabetic-masked hypertensives tended to be higher than in normotensives (hazard rate [HR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97–3.97; P =0.059), similar to untreated stage 1 hypertensives (HR, 1.07; CI, 0.58–1.98; P =0.82), but less than stage 2 hypertensives (HR, 0.53; CI, 0.29–0.99; P =0.048). In contrast, cardiovascular risk was not significantly different in antihypertensive-treated diabetic-masked hypertensives, as compared with the normotensive comparator group (HR, 1.13; CI, 0.54–2.35; P =0.75), stage 1 hypertensives (HR, 0.91; CI, 0.49–1.69; P =0.76), and stage 2 hypertensives (HR, 0.65; CI, 0.35–1.20; P =0.17). In the untreated diabetic-masked hypertensive population, mean conventional systolic/diastolic blood pressure was 129.2±8.0/76.0±7.3 mm Hg, and mean daytime systolic/diastolic blood pressure 141.5±9.1/83.7±6.5 mm Hg. In conclusion, masked hypertension occurred in 29% of untreated diabetics, had comparable cardiovascular risk as stage 1 hypertension, and would require considerable reduction in conventional blood pressure to reach daytime ambulatory treatment goal. Importantly, many hypertensive diabetics when receiving antihypertensive therapy can present with normalized conventional and elevated ambulatory blood pressure that mimics masked hypertension. # Novelty and Significance {#article-title-46}Although distinguishing features of masked hypertension in diabetics are well known, the significance of antihypertensive treatment on clinical practice decisions has not been fully explored. We analyzed 9691 subjects from the population-based 11-country International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes. Prevalence of masked hypertension in untreated normotensive participants was higher (P<0.0001) among 229 diabetics (29.3%, n=67) than among 5486 nondiabetics (18.8%, n=1031). Over a median of 11.0 years of follow-up, the adjusted risk for a composite cardiovascular end point in untreated diabetic-masked hypertensives tended to be higher than in normotensives (hazard rate [HR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97–3.97; P=0.059), similar to untreated stage 1 hypertensives (HR, 1.07; CI, 0.58–1.98; P=0.82), but less than stage 2 hypertensives (HR, 0.53; CI, 0.29–0.99; P=0.048). In contrast, cardiovascular risk was not significantly different in antihypertensive-treated diabetic-masked hypertensives, as compared with the normotensive comparator group (HR, 1.13; CI, 0.54–2.35; P=0.75), stage 1 hypertensives (HR, 0.91; CI, 0.49–1.69; P=0.76), and stage 2 hypertensives (HR, 0.65; CI, 0.35–1.20; P=0.17). In the untreated diabetic-masked hypertensive population, mean conventional systolic/diastolic blood pressure was 129.2±8.0/76.0±7.3 mm Hg, and mean daytime systolic/diastolic blood pressure 141.5±9.1/83.7±6.5 mm Hg. In conclusion, masked hypertension occurred in 29% of untreated diabetics, had comparable cardiovascular risk as stage 1 hypertension, and would require considerable reduction in conventional blood pressure to reach daytime ambulatory treatment goal. Importantly, many hypertensive diabetics when receiving antihypertensive therapy can present with normalized conventional and elevated ambulatory blood pressure that mimics masked hypertension.

Prognostic Value of Ambulatory Heart Rate Revisited in 6928 Subjects From 6 Populations

The evidence relating mortality and morbidity to heart rate remains inconsistent. We performed 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in 6928 subjects (not on &bgr;-blockers; mean age: 56.2 years; 46.5% women) enrolled in prospective population studies in Denmark, Belgium, Japan, Sweden, Uruguay, and China. We computed standardized hazard ratios for heart rate, while stratifying for cohort, and adjusting for blood pressure and other cardiovascular risk factors. Over 9.6 years (median), 850, 325, and 493 deaths accrued for total, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality, respectively. The incidence of fatal combined with nonfatal end points was 805, 363, 439, and 324 for cardiovascular, stroke, cardiac, and coronary events, respectively. Twenty-four-hour heart rate predicted total (hazard ratio: 1.15) and noncardiovascular (hazard ratio: 1.18) mortality but not cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio: 1.11) or any of the fatal combined with nonfatal events (hazard ratio: ≤1.02). Daytime heart rate did not predict mortality (hazard ratio: ≤1.11) or any fatal combined with nonfatal event (hazard ratio: ≤0.96). Nighttime heart rate predicted all of the mortality outcomes (hazard ratio: ≥1.15) but none of the fatal combined with nonfatal events (hazard ratio: ≤1.11). The night:day heart rate ratio predicted total (hazard ratio: 1.14) and noncardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio: 1.12) and all of the fatal combined with nonfatal events (hazard ratio: ≥1.15) with the exception of stroke (hazard ratio: 1.06). Sensitivity analyses, in which we stratified by risk factors or from which we excluded 1 cohort at a time or the events occurring within 2 years of enrollment, showed consistent results. In the general population, heart rate predicts total and noncardiovascular mortality. With the exception of the night:day heart rate ratio, heart rate did not add to the risk stratification for fatal combined with nonfatal cardiovascular events. Thus, heart rate adds little to the prediction of cardiovascular risk.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in 9357 Subjects From 11 Populations Highlights Missed Opportunities for Cardiovascular Prevention in Women

To analyze sex-specific relative and absolute risks associated with blood pressure (BP), we performed conventional and 24-hour ambulatory BP measurements in 9357 subjects (mean age, 52.8 years; 47% women) recruited from 11 populations. We computed standardized multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios for associations between outcome and systolic BP. During a course of 11.2 years (median), 1245 participants died, 472 of cardiovascular causes. The number of fatal combined with nonfatal events was 1080, 525, and 458 for cardiovascular and cardiac events and for stroke, respectively. In women and men alike, systolic BP predicted outcome, irrespective of the type of BP measurement. Women compared with men were at lower risk (hazard ratios for death and all cardiovascular events=0.66 and 0.62, respectively; P<0.001). However, the relation of all cardiovascular events with 24-hour BP (P=0.020) and the relations of total mortality (P=0.023) and all cardiovascular (P=0.0013), cerebrovascular (P=0.045), and cardiac (P=0.034) events with nighttime BP were steeper in women than in men. Consequently, per a 1-SD decrease, the proportion of potentially preventable events was higher in women than in men for all cardiovascular events (35.9% vs 24.2%) in relation to 24-hour systolic BP (1-SD, 13.4 mm Hg) and for all-cause mortality (23.1% vs 12.3%) and cardiovascular (35.1% vs 19.4%), cerebrovascular (38.3% vs 25.9%), and cardiac (31.0% vs 16.0%) events in relation to systolic nighttime BP (1-SD, 14.1 mm Hg). In conclusion, although absolute risks associated with systolic BP were lower in women than men, our results reveal a vast and largely unused potential for cardiovascular prevention by BP-lowering treatment in women.