Why the study?
Recent AHA and ESH guidelines differ substantially regarding BP measurement methodology, prompting a need to explain the ESH/ESC position on conservative thresholds and ambulatory measurement.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review article
May support conservative BP thresholds and ambulatory monitoring per ESC; leaves open optimal measurement standardization across guidelines.
The new international guidelines on hypertension management have been issued in the past few years. The AHA (2017) and ESH (2018) Guidelines are similar in many key aspects. However, they differ substantially in the area of blood pressure (BP) measurement methodology. In this article, we aim to explain the ESC Guidelines position, specifically the conservative BP thresholds and a wider use of ambulatory BP measurement methods. In our opinion, the main reason behind this position is the introduction and a relatively widespread use of automatic office BP measurement (AOBP). On one hand, this method has questioned the results of the SPRINT trial – the key evidence source for the AHA Guidelines. On the other hand, AOBP has challenged the concept of “traditional office BP measurement”. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the current multiplicity of BP measurement methods and respective threshold values recommended for each method. It is essential to perform the office BP measurement correctly and thoroughly. Throughout all stages of the hypertensive patient management (diagnosis, antihypertensive treatment choice, and long-term observation), the use of out-of-clinic BP measurement is strongly advisable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Горбунов et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: