Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure profiles of high-risk patients in general practice: data from an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring registry

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the elderly

The incidence of hypertension is high in the elderly and is present in 2/3 of the patients older than 65 years. Prevalence can reach 90% in patients older than 80 years. The presence of isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) is characteristic of this population. However, the prevalence of hypertension by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is not well known. In this study, we analyzed the special characteristics of hypertension in this population, giving special emphasis on ABPM readings.

Limitations of the usual blood-pressure hypothesis and importance of variability, instability, and episodic hypertension

Although hypertension is the most prevalent treatable vascular risk factor, how it causes end-organ damage and vascular events is poorly understood. Yet, a widespread belief exists that underlying usual blood pressure can alone account for all blood-pressure-related risk of vascular events and for the benefits of antihypertensive drugs, and this notion has come to underpin all major clinical guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Other potentially informative measures, such as variability in clinic blood pressure or maximum blood pressure reached, have been neglected, and effects of antihypertensive drugs on such measures are largely unknown. Clinical guidelines recommend that episodic hypertension is not treated, and the potential risks of residual variability in blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients have been ignored. This Review discusses shortcomings of the usual blood-pressure hypothesis, provides background to accompanying reports on the importance of blood-pressure variability in prediction of risk of vascular events and in accounting for benefits of antihypertensive drugs, and draws attention to clinical implications and directions for future research.

Gender differences in office and ambulatory control of hypertension

BACKGROUND

Gender differences in hypertension control have not been explored fully.

METHODS

We studied 15,212 white men and 13,936 white women with treated hypertension who were drawn from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Registry. For each participant, we obtained office blood pressure (BP) (average of 2 readings) and 24-hour ambulatory BP (average of measurements performed every 20 minutes during day and night).

RESULTS

Only 16.4% of women and 14.7% of men had both office (<140/90 mm Hg) and ambulatory (<130/80 mm Hg) BP controlled (P<.001). Women had a lower frequency of masked hypertension (office BP<140/90 mm Hg and ambulatory BP> or =130/80 mm Hg) than men (5.9% vs 7.9%, P<.001). Women had a higher frequency of isolated office hypertension (office BP> or =140/90 mm Hg and ambulatory BP<130/80 mm Hg) (32.5% vs 24.2%, P<.001). Although office BP control (office BP<140/90 mm Hg, regardless of ambulatory values) was similar in women and men (22.3% vs 22.6%, P=.542), ambulatory BP control (ambulatory BP<130/80 mm Hg, regardless of office values) was higher in women than in men (48.9% vs 38.9%, P<.001). After adjustment for age, number of antihypertensive drugs, hypertension duration, and risk factors, gender differences in BP control remained practically unchanged.

CONCLUSION

Ambulatory BP control was higher in women than in men. This may be due to the higher frequency of isolated office hypertension in women, and it is not explained by gender differences in other important clinical characteristics.