Key result
Bedtime hypertension chronotherapy and 48-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring are recommended for the diagnosis and management of true arterial hypertension based on MAPEC and Hygia trial findings.
Why the study?
To describe the investigative protocols of the MAPEC and Hygia Chronotherapy trials and discuss the advantages, limitations, and implications of their findings for diagnosing and managing true arterial hypertension using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.
This review of the MAPEC and Hygia trials advocates for the use of 48-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to diagnose hypertension and guide bedtime chronotherapy.
Supports bedtime chronotherapy and 48-h ABPM; leaves open confirmation in prospective RCTs before practice change.
The purpose of this communication is to describe the unique features of the investigative protocols of both MAPEC and Hygia Chronotherapy Trial and to discuss in detail the advantages, limitations, and potential implications of their findings, both for the diagnosis and management of true arterial hypertension that we propose must be defined according to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM)-based criteria. In particular, the recommended approach for diagnosis and follow-up of hypertension derived from the findings of MAPEC and Hygia Chronotherapy Trial entails baseline 48-h ABPM assessment for both proper diagnosis of true arterial hypertension and establishment of the eventual need of therapeutic intervention, plus follow-up by periodic 48-h ABPM assessment, specifically for evaluation of timed treatment efficacy and safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hermida et al. (2020) conducted a review in arterial hypertension. Bedtime hypertension chronotherapy and 48-h ABPM assessment was evaluated. Bedtime hypertension chronotherapy and 48-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring are recommended for the diagnosis and management of true arterial hypertension based on MAPEC and Hygia trial findings.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: