Key result
Home BP variability linked to ~36% higher CV risk per SD, modestly outperforming ambulatory variability.
Why the study?
Although blood pressure variability is associated with cardiovascular prognoses, whether short-term 24-hour ambulatory BPV or day-to-day home BPV is a superior clinical marker has not been established.
Does home blood pressure variability predict cardiovascular events better than ambulatory blood pressure variability in hypertensive outpatients?
Cohort (n=1,314)
Does home blood pressure variability predict cardiovascular events better than ambulatory blood pressure variability in hypertensive outpatients?
Day-to-day home blood pressure variability is a superior clinical marker for predicting cardiovascular prognosis compared to short-term 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Home BP variability may aid CV risk stratification in hypertension; hypothesis-generating for superiority over ambulatory measures in prospective studies.
BACKGROUND: Although blood pressure variability (BPV) is reported to be associated with cardiovascular prognoses, it has not been established whether ambulatory BPV (ABPV; ie, short-term 24-hour BPV) or home BPV (HBPV; day-to-day BPV) is a superior clinical marker. METHODS: We analyzed the associations of ABPV and HBPV with cardiovascular prognoses and biomarkers in 1314 hypertensive outpatients who underwent both home and ambulatory BP measurements in the J-HOP study (Japan Morning-Surge Home Blood Pressure). BPV was evaluated by the SD, coefficient of variation, and average real variability of the patients' 24-hour ambulatory and home systolic BP values. RESULTS: During the median 7.0-year follow-up, 109 cardiovascular events occurred. All SD, coefficient of variation, and average real variability values of the HBPV were significantly associated with cardiovascular risk even after adjusting by average 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP and each ABPV value: 1 SD of hazard ratio (95% CI) for the SD, 1.36 (1.14-1.63); coefficient of variation, 1.38 (1.16-1.66); and average real variability 1.29 (1.10-1.51) of HBPV. The ABPV parameters did not exhibit comparable relationships. The cardiovascular risk spline curves showed a trend toward increased risks with increasing HBPV parameters. There were no differences between ABPV and HBPV in the relationships with B-type natriuretic peptide and the urine albumin-creatine ratio. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis of ambulatory and home BP monitoring values in individuals with hypertension, ABPV was not significantly associated with cardiovascular prognosis adjusted by average BP level, and HBPV was suggested to have modest superiority in predicting cardiovascular prognosis compared with ABPV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Narita et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Hypertension (n=1,314). Home blood pressure variability (HBPV) vs. Ambulatory blood pressure variability (ABPV) was evaluated on Cardiovascular events (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.14-1.63). Home blood pressure variability was significantly associated with cardiovascular risk (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.14-1.63 per 1 SD increase) and showed modest superiority over ambulatory BP variability.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: