Key result
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in untreated subjects had high reproducibility for mean values but modest reproducibility for circadian profiles (concordance coefficient 0.34-0.57, p<0.01).
Observational (n=481)
Effect estimate: concordance coefficient 0.34-0.57
p-value: p=<0.01
In untreated subjects, ABPM has high reproducibility for mean values but modest reproducibility for circadian profiles, challenging the prognostic reliability of single-assessment blood pressure dipping patterns.
Warrants caution interpreting single ABPM circadian profiles clinically; leaves open optimal monitoring frequency for variability research.
To evaluate in untreated subjects the reproducibility of mean values and four circadian patterns between two ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) recordings separated by 1–11 months. We performed a retrospective analysis of 481 individuals (59% women) evaluated by ABPM on two occasions, visit 1 (V1) and 2 (V2), separated by 5.5+0.2 months. Four circadian patterns were defined by night/day systolic blood pressure (SBP) ratios: reverse dippers (RD), ratio >1.0; non-dippers (ND), ratio 0.9–1.0; dippers (D), ratio 0.8–<0.9; and extreme dippers (ED), ratio <0.8. Coefficients of correlation and concordance between the ABPM values at V1 and V2 and the reproducibility of the RD, ND, D and ED patterns were calculated by the percentage of the same profile from V1 to V2. Mean 24-h blood pressure (BP) at V1 and V2 was 126.8/75.9±0.5/0.5 vs. 126.5/75.7±0.5/0.4 mmHg (NS). Nighttime SBP fall was 9.8±0.4 (V1) and 9.6±0.3% (V2) (NS). The correlation coefficient of ABPM data at V1 vs. at V2 was 0.41–0.69 (p<0.001) and the concordance coefficient was 0.34–0.57 (p<0.01). At V1, 38 subjects were classified as ED (7.9%); D, n=216 (44.9%), 187 as ND (38.9%) and 40 as RD (8.3%). At V2 only 26.3% of ED, 44.9% of D, 54.5% of ND and 40% of RD maintained the same profile as at V1. In untreated subjects ABPM has high reproducibility for mean values but only modest reproducibility for circadian profiles, thereby challenging the prognostic value of BP dipping patterns. Avaliar em indivíduos não medicados a reprodutibilidade dos valores médios e dos quatro perfis circadiários entre dois registos de pressurometria ambulatória de 24 horas (MAPA) separados de 1-11 meses. Análise retrospetiva de 481 indivíduos (59% mulheres) avaliados por MAPA em dois dias, visita um (V1) e visita dois (V2) separados por 5,5 + 0,2 meses. Perfis circadiários definidos pelos ratios noite/dia da pressão sistólica (PAS) em: reverted dippers, RD se ratio > 1,0, non-dippers, ND se ratio 0,9- < 1,0, dippers, D se ratio 0,8- < 0,9 e extreme dippers, ED se ratio < 0,8. Cálculo dos coeficientes de correlação (CCc) e de concordância (Φ) entre os valores da MAPA nas V1-V2 e a reprodutibilidade dos perfis RD, ND, D e ED em V1 pela proporção de indivíduos que permaneceram no mesmo perfil em V2. As médias de 24 horas foram 126,8/75,9 ± 0,5/0,5 (V1) versus 126,5/75,7 ± 0,5/0,4 mm Hg (V2) (n.s.). A descida noturna da PAS foi 9,8 ± 0,4 (V1) e 9,6 ± 0,3% (V2) (n.s.). Entre os vários parâmetros da MAPA, os CC oscilaram 0,41-0,69 (p < 0,001) e os ΦC entre 0,34-0,57 (p < 0,01). Em V1, ED foram n = 38 (7,9%), D n = 216 (44,9%), ND n = 187 (38,9%) e RD n = 40 (8,3%). Em V2 somente mantiveram o perfil de V1, 26,3% dos ED, 44,9% dos D, 54,5% dos ND e 40% dos RD. Em indivíduos não tratados, a reprodutibilidade a menos de um ano da MAPA é elevada para os valores médios mas modesta relativamente aos perfis circadiários, sugerindo baixa preditibilidade de risco cardiovascular dos perfis de descida noturna da pressão arterial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Monte et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Untreated subjects (n=481). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was evaluated on Reproducibility of mean values and four circadian patterns between two ABPM recordings (concordance coefficient 0.34-0.57, p=<0.01). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in untreated subjects had high reproducibility for mean values but modest reproducibility for circadian profiles (concordance coefficient 0.34-0.57, p<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: