4.7 Article

Risk Stratification by Cross-Classification of Central and Brachial Systolic Blood Pressure

Journal

HYPERTENSION
Volume 79, Issue 5, Pages 1101-1111

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.18773

Keywords

brachial blood pressure; central blood pressure; cardiovascular risk; hypertension; mortality; population science

Funding

  1. Internal Medicine Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires
  2. Belgium (Leuven): European Union [HEALTH-F7-305507 HOMAGE]
  3. European Research Council [2011-294713-EPLORE, 713601-uPROPHET]
  4. European Research Area Net for Cardiovascular Diseases [JTC2017-046-PROACT]
  5. Belgium (APPREMED): The Research Institute Alliance for the Promotion of Preventive Medicine (URL)
  6. OMRON Healthcare Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan
  7. China: The National Natural Science Foundation of China [81770455, 81970353, 82070432, 82070435, 91639203]
  8. Ministry of Science and Technology, Beijing, China [2018YFC1704902]
  9. Shanghai Commissions of Science and Technology [19ZR1443300, 19YF1441000]
  10. Shanghai Shenkang Hospital Development Center [SHDC2020CR1042B]
  11. Shanghai Municipal Health Commission [201940297, GWV-10.1-XK05]
  12. Czech Republic: European Union [LSHM-CT-2006-037093, HEALTH-F4-2007-201550]
  13. Charles University Research Fund [P36]
  14. Finland: Academy of Finland [321351]
  15. Emil Aaltonen Foundation
  16. Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research
  17. Hospital District of South-Western Finland
  18. Italy: European Union [LSHM-CT-2006-037093, HEALTH-F4-2007-201550]
  19. Poland (Gdansk): European Union [LSHM-CT-2006-037093, HEALTH-F4-2007-201550]
  20. Poland (Krakow): European Union [LSHM-CT-2006-037093, HEALTHF4-2007-201550]
  21. Foundation for Polish Science
  22. Academy of Finland (AKA) [321351, 321351] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the relationship between cardiovascular risk and central and brachial systolic pressure and proposed thresholds to differentiate hypertension from normal blood pressure. Regardless of brachial blood pressure status, central hypertension was associated with increased cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk, highlighting the importance of controlling central hypertension.
Background: Whether cardiovascular risk is more tightly associated with central (cSBP) than brachial (bSBP) systolic pressure remains debated, because of their close correlation and uncertain thresholds to differentiate cSBP into normotension versus hypertension. Methods: In a person-level meta-analysis of the International Database of Central Arterial Properties for Risk Stratification (n=5576; 54.1% women; mean age 54.2 years), outcome-driven thresholds for cSBP were determined and whether the cross-classification of cSBP and bSBP improved risk stratification was explored. cSBP was tonometrically estimated from the radial pulse wave using SphygmoCor software. Results: Over 4.1 years (median), 255 composite cardiovascular end points occurred. In multivariable bootstrapped analyses, cSBP thresholds (in mm Hg) of 110.5 (95% CI, 109.1-111.8), 120.2 (119.4-121.0), 130.0 (129.6-130.3), and 149.5 (148.4-150.5) generated 5-year cardiovascular risks equivalent to the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association bSBP thresholds of 120, 130, 140, and 160. Applying 120/130 mm Hg as cSBP/bSBP thresholds delineated concordant central and brachial normotension (43.1%) and hypertension (48.2%) versus isolated brachial hypertension (5.0%) and isolated central hypertension (3.7%). With concordant normotension as reference, the multivariable hazard ratios for the cardiovascular end point were 1.30 (95% CI, 0.58-2.94) for isolated brachial hypertension, 2.28 (1.21-4.30) for isolated central hypertension, and 2.02 (1.41-2.91) for concordant hypertension. The increased cardiovascular risk associated with isolated central and concordant hypertension was paralleled by cerebrovascular end points with hazard ratios of 3.71 (1.37-10.06) and 2.60 (1.35-5.00), respectively. Conclusions: Irrespective of the brachial blood pressure status, central hypertension increased cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk indicating the importance of controlling central hypertension.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available