Prevalence of masked uncontrolled hypertension according to the number of office blood pressure measurements

Simultaneous 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement on both arms: a consideration for improving hypertension management

OBJECTIVE

Arterial hypertension is one of the common treatment goals in today's medicine. 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) performed by oscillometric cuff-based devices is considered as the gold standard in hypertension diagnostics. This study aims at examining the measurement accuracy of a widely used, ABPM device.

METHODS

Fifty-two young and healthy participants underwent simultaneous 24-h ABPM on the left and the right upper arm using two Boso/A&D TM-2430 oscillometric cuff-based devices. Pressure curves of the cuffs, as well as hydrostatic pressure difference between the cuffs were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean differences between both simultaneous measurements were 1.16 mmHg with limits of agreement of 36.23 mmHg for SBP and 1.32 mmHg with limits of agreement of 32.65 mmHg for DBP. Excluding measurements where the pressure curves were disturbed and correcting for hydrostatic pressure difference between the cuffs, reduced the measurement error. However, limits of agreement remained around 20 mmHg. There were large differences in hypertension grading and dipping pattern classification between simultaneous measurements on the left and right arm.

CONCLUSION

The cuff-based ABPM device reveals notable measurement uncertainties, influencing hypertension grading, dipping pattern classification and blood pressure variability. These effects are attributed in part to disturbances during cuff deflation and hydrostatic influences. Nonetheless, ABPM has shown its clinical values in several studies, while this study underscores its still unlocked potential to improve hypertension management.

Current applications and limitations of European guidelines on blood pressure measurement: implications for clinical practice

Hypertension is the most common cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of major CV outcomes, including myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure, renal disease and death due to CV causes. Effective control of hypertension is of key importance for reducing the risk of hypertension-related CV complications, as well as for reducing the global burden of CV mortality. However, several studies reported relatively poor rates of control of high blood pressure (BP) in a setting of real-life practice. To improve hypertension management and control, national and international scientific societies proposed several educational and therapeutic interventions, among which the systematic implementation of out-of-office BP measurements represents a key element. Indeed, proper assessment of individual BP profile, including home, clinic and 24-h ambulatory BP levels, may improve awareness of the disease, ensure high level of adherence to prescribed medications in treated hypertensive patients, and thus contribute to ameliorate BP control in treated hypertensive outpatients. In line with these purposes, recent European guidelines have released practical recommendations and clear indications on how, when and how properly measuring BP levels in different clinical settings, with different techniques and different methods. This review aimed at discussing current applications and potential limitations of European guidelines on how to measure BP in office and out-of-office conditions, and their potential implications in the daily clinical management of hypertension.

Prevalence of masked hypertension evaluated by home blood pressure monitoring in a large sample of patients with office blood pressure <140/90 mmHg

AIM

Patients with masked hypertension have a higher incidence of target organ damage, including increased left ventricular mass and carotid atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events when compared with normotensive patients. The adverse cardiovascular risks are even greater in patients already taking antihypertensive medication.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the prevalence and clinical characteristics of masked hypertension in a large multicenter Brazilian sample that underwent office and home blood pressure monitoring.

METHODS

This was an observational cross-sectional analytical study based on secondary data from the teleMRPA online platform, which included 32 cities from 15 states in the five regions of Brazil. The database included 3704 outpatient participants with office blood pressure <140/90 mmHg who performed home blood pressure monitoring for diagnostic investigation (diagnosis group; n = 1819) or treatment (treatment group; n = 1885) of hypertension in 2018.

RESULTS

The prevalence of masked hypertension was 18.0% in the whole studied population and 15.4% and 20.4% in the diagnostic and treatment group, respectively. Masked hypertension was more frequently detected in patients with office blood pressure classified as high normal [systolic blood pressure (SBP) = 130-139 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) = 85-89 mmHg], followed by those classified as normal (SBP = 120-129 mmHg or DBP = 80-84 mmHg) and optimal (SBP < 120 mmHg and DBP < 80 mmHg), with respective prevalence of 28.3, 13.4 and 4.4% in the diagnostic group and 30.8, 18.8 and 7.1% in the treatment group.

CONCLUSION

Masked hypertension has a significant prevalence among individuals with office blood pressure <140/90 mmHg, which is greater with patients with high normal office blood pressure and even higher in patients already using antihypertensive medication.

Nocturnal blood pressure patterns and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with masked hypertension

Masked hypertension (MHT) is characterized by normal clinic and above normal 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) levels. We evaluated clinical characteristics and CV outcomes of different nocturnal patterns of MHT. We analyzed data derived from a large cohort of adult individuals, who consecutively underwent home, clinic, and ambulatory BP monitoring at our Hypertension Unit between January 2007 and December 2016. MHT was defined as clinic BP <140/90 mm Hg and 24-hour BP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg, and stratified into three groups according to dipping status: (a) dippers, (b) nondippers, and (c) reverse dippers. From an overall sample of 6695 individuals, we selected 2628 (46.2%) adult untreated individuals, among whom 153 (5.0%) had MHT. In this group, 67 (43.8%) were nondippers, 65 (42.5%) dippers, and 21 (13.7%) reverse dippers. No significant differences were found among groups regarding demographics, clinical characteristics, and prevalence of risk factors, excluding older age in reverse dippers compared to other groups (P < 0.001). Systolic BP levels were significantly higher in reverse dippers than in other groups at both 24-hour (135.6 ± 8.5 vs 130.4 ± 6.0 vs 128.2 ± 6.8 mm Hg, respectively; P < 0.001) and nighttime periods (138.2 ± 9.1 vs 125.0 ± 6.3 vs 114.5 ± 7.7 mm Hg; P < 0.001). Reverse dipping was associated with a significantly higher risk of stroke, even after correction for age, gender, BMI, dyslipidemia, and diabetes (OR 18.660; 95% IC [1.056-33.813]; P = 0.046). MHT with reverse dipping status was associated with higher burden of BP and relatively high risk of stroke compared to both dipping and nondipping profiles, although a limited number of CV outcomes have been recorded during the follow-up.

Diagnostic accuracy of manual office blood pressure measurement in ambulatory hypertensive patients in Korea

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Currently, office blood pressure (OBP) is the most widely used method of measuring blood pressure (BP) in daily clinical practice. However, data on the diagnostic accuracy of OBP in reference to ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) are scarce in Korea.

METHODS

In retrospective and prospective cohorts, manual OBP and ABP measurements were compared among ambulatory hypertensive patients. Hypertension was defined as systolic OBP ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic OBP ≥ 90 mmHg, and systolic ABP ≥ 130 mmHg and/or diastolic ABP ≥ 80 mmHg.

RESULTS

In the retrospective cohort (n = 903), the mean OBP1 (before ABP measurement) was higher than ABP in both systolic (138 ± 17 mmHg vs. 123 ± 13 mmHg, p < 0.001) and diastolic (84 ± 12 mmHg vs. 78 ± 11 mmHg, p < 0.001) measurements. Interestingly, there was only a weak correlation between OBP and ABP (r² = 0.038, p < 0.001). The overall discordance rate of OBP compared to ABP, which is the reference method for measuring BP, was 43.9%. The prospective cohort (n = 57) showed similar results. In a subgroup analysis, male patients had higher false negative results (masked or under-treated hypertension) than did female patients (26.1% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.003), whereas female patients had a higher false positive rate (white-coat or over-treated hypertension) than did male patients (28.7% vs. 15.2%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic accuracy of manual OBP is low in reference to ABP. Men and women have different patterns of discordance. These findings indicate that management of hypertensive patients with manual OBP measurements may be suboptimal and encourages the use of ABP in ambulatory hypertensive patients.