Key result
In a healthy general population, higher visit-to-visit variability in diastolic blood pressure was significantly associated with the development of metabolic syndrome (OR 1.033 per 1 mmHg increase in standard deviation of DBP).
Why the study?
While visit-to-visit blood pressure variability is linked to cardiovascular disease, its effect on the development of metabolic syndrome in a general population without cardiovascular disease, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, or blood pressure medication remained unexamined.
Does visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure predict the development of metabolic syndrome in a healthy general population?
Cohort (n=3,452)
Yes
Does visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure predict the development of metabolic syndrome in a healthy general population?
Odds Ratio: 1.033 (95% CI 1.003–1.063)
p-value: p=0.030
Visit-to-visit variability in diastolic blood pressure is independently associated with the future development of metabolic syndrome in a healthy general population.
Higher SBP was associated with metabolic syndrome development; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
Previous studies demonstrated that visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure (BP) has significant relationship with cardiovascular disease. Visit-to-visit variability in BP might have prognostic value for cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of visit-to-visit variability in BP on development of metabolic syndrome in general population without cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, and BP medication. We used data from the Korean Genome Epidemiology Study conducted by the Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. All cohorts who were followed first 3 periods formed the basis of the study sample, which consisted of 7195 people. Of these samples, 3431 subjects who had cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or metabolic syndrome were excluded, and 312 subjects who were using antihypertensive medication in first 3 periods were excluded. Our final study sample consisted of 3452 cohorts. The mean age was 53.5 (8.25) years. The proportion of male was 50.2%. Average follow-up duration was 5.91 (0.17) years. In generalized estimating equation, the development of metabolic syndrome was associated with mean systolic BP (SBP) (Odd ratio (OR) 1.042, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.035–1.048, p < 0.001), mean diastolic BP (DBP) (OR 1.058, 95% CI 1.049–1.069, p < 0.001), standard deviation (SD) of SBP (OR 1.036, 95% CI 1.017–1.055, p < 0.001), SD of DBP (OR 1.053, 95% CI 1.027–1.080, p < 0.001), and coefficient of variation (CV) of DBP (OR 1.025, 95% CI 1.005–1.046, p = 0.016) after adjusted for age, sex, and metabolic syndrome component. When mean SBP, mean DBP, SBP variability, and DBP variability were entered all together in the analysis model, SD of DBP (OR 1.033, 95% CI 1.003–1.063, p = 0.030) and CV of DBP (OR 1.027, 95% CI 1.004–1.051, p = 0.020) were significantly associated with the development of metabolic syndrome. In general population without cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, and BP medication, SD of DBP and CV of DBP was associated with the development of metabolic syndrome. Visit-to-visit variability in DBP might be helpful for the prediction of future metabolic syndrome development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Metabolic syndrome (n=3,452). Visit-to-visit variability in diastolic blood pressure vs. Lower variability was evaluated on Development of metabolic syndrome (OR 1.033, 95% CI 1.003-1.063, p=0.030). In a healthy general population, higher visit-to-visit variability in diastolic blood pressure was significantly associated with the development of metabolic syndrome (OR 1.033 per 1 mmHg increase in standard deviation of DBP).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: