Key result
Systolic interarm difference ≥10 mm Hg is linked to ~145% higher odds of LVH.
Why the study?
Evidence on the association of interarm difference in BP with subclinical cardiac and vascular damage in community-based populations was scanty.
Is systolic interarm blood pressure difference associated with subclinical cardiac and vascular damage in a community-based population?
Cross-Sectional (n=527)
Is systolic interarm blood pressure difference associated with subclinical cardiac and vascular damage in a community-based population?
Systolic interarm blood pressure difference ≥ 10 mm Hg is associated with a higher prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy, suggesting it may serve as a clinical marker to prompt investigation for subclinical cardiac organ damage.
Interarm systolic difference may mark LVH risk but lost significance after adjustment; leaves open independent association requiring prospective study.
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the association of interarm difference (IAD) in BP with subclinical cardiac and vascular damage in community-based populations is scanty. We addressed this issue in the participants to the Pressioni Monitorate E Loro Associazioni (PAMELA) study. METHODS: The study included 527 participants who attended the third survey of the PAMELA study performed after 25 years from the initial evaluation. Data collection included medical history, anthropometric parameters, blood examinations, office BP, simultaneous IAD assessment, echocardiographic and cardio-ankle velocity index (CAVI) measurements. RESULTS: In the whole study sample (age 66 ± 10 years, 49% males), the prevalence of systolic IAD (ie, IASD ≥ 10 mm Hg) was 12%. Although the association between IASD and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (OR = 2.45, P = .007) disappeared after adjustment for several factors, this abnormal BP phenotype was twice as high in participants with LVH compared to those with normal LV geometry (21.7% vs 10.2%, P < .01). Furthermore, the prevalence of IASD in participants with LVH and LV remodeling was overall 3 times higher than in their normal counterparts. As for vascular damage, no relationship emerged between IASD with CAVI, treated either as a categorical (ie, CAVI > 9 m/second) or continuous variable. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a new piece of evidence on the value of IASD as a potential marker of LVH, which in turn reflects the burden of several coexisting cardiovascular risk factors. From a practical perspective, the detection of IASD could be a clinical rationale for investigating subclinical cardiac organ damage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuspidi et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Interarm blood pressure difference and subclinical organ damage (n=527). Systolic interarm difference (IASD ≥ 10 mm Hg) vs. Normal left ventricular geometry was evaluated on Association between systolic interarm difference and left ventricular hypertrophy (OR 2.45, p=0.007). Systolic interarm difference ≥10 mm Hg was twice as prevalent in participants with left ventricular hypertrophy compared to those with normal left ventricular geometry (21.7% vs 10.2%, P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: