Blood pressure measurement modalities and indexed left ventricular mass in men with low-risk hypertension confirmed by ambulatory monitoring

Background:Blood pressure (BP) measurement modalities such as ambulatory monitoring (ABPM) and noninvasive central aortic systolic pressure (CASP), have been reported to improve prediction of hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD) compared with conventional clinic BP. However, clinic BP is often confounded by poor measurement technique and 'white-coat hypertension' (WCH). We compared prediction of cardiac MRI (cMRI)-derived left ventricular mass index (LVMI) by differing BP measurement modalities in young men with elevated BP, confirmed by ABPM.Methods:One hundred and forty-three treatment-naive men (<55 years) with hypertension confirmed by ABPM and no clinical evidence of HMOD or cardiovascular disease (37% with masked hypertension) were enrolled. Relationships between BP modalities and cMRI-LVMI were evaluated.Results:Men with higher LVMI (upper quintile) had higher clinic, central and ambulatory SBP compared with men with lower LVMI. Regression coefficients for SBP with LVMI did not differ across BP modalities (r = 0.32; 0.3; 0.31, for clinic SBP, CASP and 24-h ABPM, respectively, P < 0.01 all). Prediction for high LVMI using receiver-operated curve analyses was similar between measurement modalities. No relationship between DBP and LVMI was seen across measurement modalities.Conclusion:In younger men with hypertension confirmed by ABPM and low cardiovascular risk, clinic SBP and CASP, measured under research conditions, that is, with strict adherence to guideline recommendations, performs as well as ABPM in predicting LVMI. Prior reports of inferiority for clinic BP in predicting HMOD and potentially, clinical outcomes, may be due to poor measurement technique and/or failure to exclude WCH.

Automated summary

This study compared the effectiveness of different blood pressure measurement modalities in predicting hypertension-mediated cardiac damage. The results showed that under strict measurement conditions, clinic blood pressure and noninvasive central aortic systolic pressure were as effective as 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in predicting left ventricular mass index. Previous observations of inferiority of clinic blood pressure in predicting cardiac damage may be due to poor measurement technique or failure to exclude white-coat hypertension.