Key result
Higher systolic BP variability is linked to faster progression of abnormal white matter volume.
Why the study?
Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability may contribute to cerebral white matter lesion progression, but previous evidence was inconsistent and limited by methodological heterogeneity.
Does higher visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability increase cerebral white matter lesion progression in patients with high cardiovascular risk?
Cohort (n=952)
Yes
Does higher visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability increase cerebral white matter lesion progression in patients with high cardiovascular risk?
Higher visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability is independently associated with faster progression of cerebral white matter lesions, and reducing this variability partially mediates the neuroprotective effects of intensive blood pressure control.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BP variability may accelerate white matter progression in high-risk patients; extends observational data but leaves causal effects and intervention targets open.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability (BPV) may contribute to cerebral white matter lesions (WML) progression, but previous evidence has been inconsistent and limited by methodological heterogeneity. This study aimed to assess the association between BPV and WML progression and its mediating role in the neuroprotective effects of intensive blood pressure (BP) control. METHODS: This post hoc individual participant data pooled analysis included the MRI substudies of ACCORD MIND and SPRINT MIND. Participants were eligible if they had both baseline and follow-up MRI scans and at least 3 BP measurements from the 3-month visit onward. Systolic BPV was calculated using multiple indices, with variation independent of mean (VIM) prespecified as the primary metric. WML progression was quantified as absolute and annualized changes in abnormal white matter (AWM) volume, with inverse hyperbolic sine (asinh)-transformed total change as the primary metric. Associations between systolic BPV and AWM volume changes were examined using multivariable linear regression, and causal mediation analysis assessed whether systolic BPV mediated the effects of intensive BP control. RESULTS: A total of 952 participants (mean age 64.8 years [SD 7.1]; 400 [42%] women) were included, contributing a median of 12 (interquartile range 10-14) BP measurements. Median AWM volume increased from 1.69 mL to 2.58 mL (0.43 mL per year [SD 0.84]). Higher systolic BPV was independently associated with faster AWM volume progression (β = 0.017, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.033). In raw annualized terms, participants in the highest tertile of SBP-VIM had 0.160 mL/y faster AWM progression than those in the lowest tertile. Intensive BP control was associated with slower AWM volume progression (β = -0.270, 95% CI -0.393 to -0.146). Mediation analysis indicated that systolic BPV partially mediated the association between intensive BP control and reduced AWM volume progression (average causal mediation effect 0.014, 95% CI 0.001-0.034), accounting for 9.15% of the total effect. DISCUSSION: Higher visit-to-visit systolic BPV was independently associated with faster WML progression. The benefit of intensive BP lowering on white matter integrity was partly mediated by reduced BPV, suggesting BP stability as a modifiable target to prevent white matter injury.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhao et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in High cardiovascular risk (n=952). Visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability (SBP-VIM) vs. Lower visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability was evaluated on Progression of abnormal white matter (AWM) volume (asinh-transformed total change) (β = 0.017, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.033, p=0.032). Higher visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability was independently associated with faster abnormal white matter volume progression (β = 0.017, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.033, p=0.032).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: