Prognostic Influence of Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressures in Resistant Hypertension

Rua Croton, 72, Jacarepagua, Rio de Janeiro - RJ, Brasil, CEP: 22750-240.
Archives of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 13.25). 12/2008; 168(21):2340-6. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.168.21.2340
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The prognostic value of office and ambulatory blood pressures (BPs) in patients with resistant hypertension is uncertain.
This prospective study investigates the importance of office and ambulatory BPs as predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. At baseline, 556 resistant hypertensive patients underwent clinical-laboratory and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring examinations. Primary end points were a composite of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events and all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities. Multiple Cox regression was used to assess associations between BP and subsequent end points.
After median follow-up of 4.8 years, 109 patients (19.6%) reached the primary end point, and 70 all-cause deaths (12.6%) occurred (46 had cardiovascular causes). After adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, smoking, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, previous cardiovascular diseases, serum creatinine level, and number of antihypertensive drugs in use, no office BP showed any prognostic value. After further adjustment for office BP, higher mean ambulatory BPs were independent predictors of the composite end point. The hazard ratios associated with a 1-SD increment in daytime and nighttime systolic BP were 1.26 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.53) and 1.38 (1.13-1.68), respectively; the corresponding values for diastolic BP were 1.31 (1.05-1.63) and 1.36 (1.10-1.69). Ambulatory systolic and diastolic BP were equivalent predictors, and both were better than pulse pressure; nighttime BP was superior to daytime BP. For all-cause mortality, only the ambulatory BP monitoring diagnosis of true resistant hypertension was an independent predictor.
Higher ambulatory BP predicts cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in resistant hypertensive patients, whereas office BP has no prognostic value.

Download full-text


Available from: Elizabeth S Muxfeldt, Aug 20, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Regular exercise is an effective intervention to decrease blood pressure (BP) in hypertension, but no data are available concerning the effects of heated water-based exercise (HEx). This study examines the effects of HEx on BP in resistant hypertensive patients. This is a parallel, randomized controlled trial. 125 nonconsecutive sedentary patients with resistant hypertension from a hypertension outpatient clinic in a university hospital were screened; 32 patients fulfilled the study requirements. The training was performed for 60-minute sessions in a heated pool (32°C), three times a week for 12weeks. The HEx protocol consisted of callisthenic exercises and walking inside the pool. The control group was asked to maintain habitual activities. The main outcome measure was change in mean 24-hour ambulatory BP (ABPM). 32 patients (HEx n=16; control n=16) were randomized; none were lost to follow-up. Office BPs decreased significantly after heated water exercise (36/12mmHg). HEx decreased 24-hour systolic (from 137±23 to 120±12mmHg, p=0.001) and diastolic BPs (from 81±13 to 72±10mmHg, p=0.009); daytime systolic (from 141±24 to 120±13mmHg, p<0.0001) and diastolic BPs (from 84±14 to 73±11mmHg, p=0.003); and nighttime systolic (from 129±22 to 114±12mmHg, p=0.006) and diastolic BPs (from 74±11 to 66±10mmHg, p<0.0001). The control group after 12weeks significantly increased in 24-hour systolic and diastolic BPs, and daytime and nighttime diastolic BPs. HEx reduced office BPs and 24-hour ABPM levels in resistant hypertensive patients. These effects suggest that HEx may be a potential new therapeutic approach in these patients.
    International journal of cardiology 01/2014; 172(2). DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.01.100 · 6.18 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Not Available
    Signals, Systems and Computers, 2005. Conference Record of the Thirty-Ninth Asilomar Conference on; 01/2005
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High blood pressure (HBP) is one of the most prevalent conditions seen today by clinicians, affecting an estimated 73 million--or 1 in 3--adult Americans, only one third of whom have achieved control of their hypertension (HBP). Central to the management of this pervasive medical condition are the issues of accurate diagnosis and maintaining control through appropriate treatment. Accurate diagnosis depends primarily on reliable measurement. Over the years, it has become increasingly recognized that blood pressure (BP) measurement occurring in clinical settings produces far less accurate and reliable readings than do other methods, notably 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring and home BP measurement. Beyond technique, there are additional challenges to obtaining accurate readings, including emotional factors that produce either falsely elevated or lowered results, having the potential to mislead the clinician. The need to overcome obstacles to proper diagnosis and determine effective treatments has reached heightened urgency, especially for patients with compelling comorbidities such as diabetes, renal disease, congestive heart failure, and other cardiovascular diseases. The continuing evolution of the management of HBP is reflected in updated guidelines from the American Heart Association and evidence-based information stemming from recent studies and randomized clinical trials. The appropriate selection of antihypertensive agents, at the proper doses, is a complex issue requiring greater understanding of our pharmacologic options. The contributions of some of the more recent and salient studies and trials are mentioned here, although there is no attempt in this brief review to match drug classes with compelling indications. The trials discussed involve such pharmacologic treatments as diuretic therapy, alpha-blockers, conventional beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers. Trial outcomes shed light on the relative benefits and drawbacks of these agents, often within the context of various patient characteristics such as age, comorbidities, and risk status. Successful management of HBP is a multi-faceted and ongoing endeavor, in which developing knowledge constantly tempered by new questions moves us toward the goal of improving the lives of our patients.
    Clinical Cornerstone 01/2009; 9 Suppl 3:S27-33. DOI:10.1016/S1098-3597(09)60016-8