Key result
Ambulatory and home pulse pressure thresholds for cardiovascular risk in older adults were 64 and 76 mm Hg, respectively, but provided little added predictive value beyond classical risk factors.
Why the study?
Does out-of-office pulse pressure measurement refine cardiovascular risk stratification?
Observational
Yes
Does out-of-office pulse pressure measurement refine cardiovascular risk stratification?
Ambulatory and home pulse pressure provide little added predictive value for cardiovascular risk stratification beyond classical risk factors.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Out-of-office pulse pressure should not yet refine risk stratification in older adults; leaves open its incremental value beyond classical factors in higher-level studies.
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies have demonstrated that the risk of cardiovascular disease increases with pulse pressure (PP). However, PP remains an elusive cardiovascular risk factor with findings being inconsistent between studies. The 2013 ESH/ESC guideline proposed that PP is useful in stratification and suggested a threshold of 60 mm Hg, which is 10 mm Hg higher compared to that in the 2007 guideline; however, no justification for this increase was provided. METHODOLOGY: Published thresholds of PP are based on office blood pressure measurement and often on arbitrary categorical analyses. In the International Database on Ambulatory blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes (IDACO) and the International Database on HOme blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDHOCO), we determined outcome-driven thresholds for PP based on ambulatory or home blood pressure measurement, respectively. RESULTS: The main findings were that for people aged <60 years, PP did not refine risk stratification, whereas in older people the thresholds were 64 and 76 mm Hg for the ambulatory and home PP, respectively. However, PP provided little added predictive value over and beyond classical risk factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gu et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease risk. Ambulatory or home pulse pressure measurement was evaluated on Cardiovascular outcomes. Ambulatory and home pulse pressure thresholds for cardiovascular risk in older adults were 64 and 76 mm Hg, respectively, but provided little added predictive value beyond classical risk factors.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: