4.6 Article

Unravelling the Distinct Effects of Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure Using Mendelian Randomisation

Journal

GENES
Volume 13, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genes13071226

Keywords

blood pressure; systolic; diastolic; Mendelian randomization

Funding

  1. British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence Award [RE/18/6/34217, SIPF00007/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The genetic predisposition to high systolic blood pressure is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases such as coronary artery disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Similarly, genetic predisposition to high diastolic blood pressure is associated with an increased risk of stroke and coronary artery disease.
A true discrepancy between the effect of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes remains unclear. This study performed two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) using genetic instruments that exclusively predict SBP, DBP or both to dissect the independent effect of SBP and DBP on a range of CV outcomes. Genetic predisposition to higher SBP and DBP was associated with increased risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), atrial fibrillation (AF), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Genetically proxied SBP exclusively was associated with CAD (OR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.03-1.36, per 10 mmHg), stroke (1.44[1.28-1.62]), ischemic stroke (1.49[1.30-1.69]), HF (1.41[1.20-1.65]), AF (1.28[1.15-1.43]), and T2DM (1.2[1.13-1.46]). Genetically proxied DBP exclusively was associated with stroke (1.21[1.06-1.37], per 5 mmHg), ischemic stroke (1.24[1.09-1.41]), stroke small-vessel (1.35[1.10-1.65]) and CAD (1.19[1.00-1.41]). Multivariable MR using exclusive SBP and DBP instruments showed the predominant effect of SBP on CAD (1.23[1.05-1.44], per 10 mmHg), stroke (1.39[1.20-1.60]), ischemic stroke (1.44[1.25-1.67]), HF (1.42[1.18-1.71]), AF (1.26[1.10-1.43]) and T2DM (1.31[1.14-1.52]). The discrepancy between effects of SBP and DBP on outcomes warrants further studies on underpinning mechanisms which may be amenable to therapeutic targeting.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available