Do estimated 24-h pulse pressure components affect outcome? The Ohasama study
- PMID: 32004208
- DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002366
Do estimated 24-h pulse pressure components affect outcome? The Ohasama study
Abstract
Objective: Twenty-four-hour ambulatory pulse pressure (PP) is a powerful predictor of outcome. We attempted to apply the recently described PP components, an elastic (elPP), and systolic stiffening (stPP) components from 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (AMBP), and examine their influence on outcome in the Ohasama study population.
Design and methods: Included were participants of the Ohasama study without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD), who were followed-up for total and CVD mortality, and for stroke morbidity. The PP components were derived from 24-h SBP and DBP using a model based on the nonlinear pressure--volume relationship in arteries expressing pressure stiffness relationship. Outcome predictive power was estimated by Cox regression models; hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI), applied to elPP, and stPP, adjusted for age, sex, BMI, smoking, alcohol drinking, diabetes mellitus, total cholesterol, antihypertensive treatment, and mean arterial pressure (MAP), whenever appropriate.
Results: Of 1745 participants (age 61.4 ± 11.6, 65% women), 580 died, 212 of CVD, and 290 experienced a stroke during 17 follow-up years. PP was strongly correlated with elPP (r = 0.89) and less so with stPP (r = 0.58), and the correlation between the two components was weak (r = 0.15). After the adjustment, hazard ratio of PP per 1 SD increment for total mortality, CVD mortality, and stroke morbidity were 1.095 (95% CI 0.973-1.232), 1.207 (1.000-1.456), and 0.983 (0.829-1.166), respectively. Corresponding hazard ratios and 95% CIs were nonsignificant for elPP, and stPP. However, among participants with median pulse rate 68.5 bpm or less (median, n = 872), total (327 deaths) and CVD (131 deaths) mortality were predicted by elPP (per 1 SD increment), hazard ratio 1.231 (95% CI, 1.082-1.401), and 1.294 (95% CI, 1.069-1.566), respectively. In the subgroup of treated participants with hypertension and pulse rate 68.5 or less bpm (n = 309), total (177 deaths) and CVD (77 deaths) mortality were predicted by elPP, hazard ratio of 1.357 (95% CI, 1.131-1.628), and 1.417 (95% CI, 1.092-1.839), respectively. Stroke morbidity was not predicted by either PP or the PP components.
Conclusion: In a rural Japanese population, elPP but not stPP was predictive of total and CVD mortality even when adjusted for MAP and conventional risk factors in the subpopulation with slower pulse rate. This was mostly among the treated hypertensive patients.
Similar articles
-
Ambulatory pulse pressure components: concept, determination and clinical relevance.J Hypertens. 2019 Apr;37(4):765-774. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001920. J Hypertens. 2019. PMID: 30817458
-
Predictive power of 24-h ambulatory pulse pressure and its components for mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in 11 848 participants recruited from 13 populations.J Hypertens. 2022 Nov 1;40(11):2245-2255. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003258. Epub 2022 Aug 8. J Hypertens. 2022. PMID: 35950994 Free PMC article.
-
Ambulatory arterial stiffness index and 24-hour ambulatory pulse pressure as predictors of mortality in Ohasama, Japan.Stroke. 2007 Apr;38(4):1161-6. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000259604.67283.69. Epub 2007 Feb 22. Stroke. 2007. PMID: 17322089
-
Prognostic Effect of the Nocturnal Blood Pressure Fall in Hypertensive Patients: The Ambulatory Blood Pressure Collaboration in Patients With Hypertension (ABC-H) Meta-Analysis.Hypertension. 2016 Apr;67(4):693-700. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.115.06981. Epub 2016 Feb 22. Hypertension. 2016. PMID: 26902495 Review.
-
Observational study and participant-level meta-analysis on antihypertensive drug treatment-related cardiovascular risk.Hypertens Res. 2017 Oct 5;40(10):856-860. doi: 10.1038/hr.2017.60. Epub 2017 Apr 27. Hypertens Res. 2017. PMID: 28446803 Review.
Cited by
-
Control status of ambulatory blood pressure and its relationship with arterial stiffness in the China nationwide registry of treated hypertensive patients: the REACTION-ABP study.Hypertens Res. 2023 Oct;46(10):2302-2311. doi: 10.1038/s41440-023-01336-5. Epub 2023 Jun 12. Hypertens Res. 2023. PMID: 37308551 Free PMC article.
-
Prognostic Impact of 24-Hour Pulse Pressure Components in Treated Hypertensive Patients Older Than 65 Years.Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Feb 23;13(5):845. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13050845. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36899989 Free PMC article.
-
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for the management of hypertension.Chin Med J (Engl). 2022 May 5;135(9):1027-1035. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002028. Chin Med J (Engl). 2022. PMID: 35202040 Free PMC article.
-
The optimal pulse pressures for healthy adults with different ages and sexes correlate with cardiovascular health metrics.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Dec 5;9:930443. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.930443. eCollection 2022. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022. PMID: 36545016 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Dart AM, Kingwell BA. Pulse pressure--a review of mechanisms and clinical relevance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37:975–984.
-
- Safar ME, Levy BI, Struijker-Boudier H. Current perspectives on arterial stiffness and pulse pressure in hypertension and cardiovascular diseases. Circulation 2003; 107:2864–2869.
-
- Franklin SS, Khan SA, Wong ND, Larson MG, Levy D. Is pulse pressure useful in predicting risk for coronary heart Disease? The Framingham heart study. Circulation 1999; 100:354–360.
-
- Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Pede S, Porcellati C. Ambulatory pulse pressure: a potent predictor of total cardiovascular risk in hypertension. Hypertension 1998; 32:983–988.
-
- Staessen JA, Thijs L, O’Brien ET, Bulpitt CJ, de Leeuw PW, Fagard RH, et al. Ambulatory pulse pressure as predictor of outcome in older patients with systolic hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2002; 15 (10 Pt 1):835–843.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous