Key result
Advanced modeling links a 5 mmHg increase in BP variability to ~8% higher stroke recurrence.
Why the study?
Long-term blood pressure variability is an increasingly recognized vascular risk factor but challenging to analyze, with unclear impact of modeling choice on its estimated effect on stroke risk.
Does the choice of statistical model affect the estimated relationship between blood pressure variability and risk of stroke recurrence in patients with prior stroke?
Observational (n=6,105)
Does the choice of statistical model affect the estimated relationship between blood pressure variability and risk of stroke recurrence in patients with prior stroke?
Hazard Ratio: 1.08 (95% CI 0.99–1.17)
The statistical method used to assess blood pressure variability strongly affects its estimated effect on stroke risk, highlighting the need for advanced modeling that accounts for blood pressure dynamics over time.
Should not yet change secondary prevention; leaves open whether advanced BP variability modeling improves recurrence prediction.
Long-term blood pressure variability (BPV), an increasingly recognized vascular risk factor, is challenging to analyze. The objective was to assess the impact of BPV modeling on its estimated effect on the risk of stroke. We used data from a secondary stroke prevention trial, PROGRESS (Perindopril Protection Against Stroke Study), which included 6105 subjects. The median number of blood pressure (BP) measurements was 12 per patient and 727 patients experienced a first stroke recurrence over a mean follow-up of 4.3 years. Hazard ratios (HRs) of BPV were estimated from 6 proportional hazards models using different BPV modeling for comparison purposes. The 3 commonly used methods first derived SD of BP measures observed over a given period of follow-up and then used it as a fixed covariate in a Cox model. The 3 more advanced modeling accounted for changes in BP or BPV over time in a single-stage analysis. While the 3 commonly used methods produced contradictory results (for a 5 mmHg increase in BPV, HR=0.75 [95% CI, 0.68–0.82], HR=0.99 [0.91–1.08], HR=1.19 [1.10–1.30]), the 3 more advanced modeling resulted in a similar moderate positive association (HR=1.08 [95% CI, 0.99–1.17]), whether adjusted for BP at randomization or mean BP over the follow-up. The method used to assess BPV strongly affects its estimated effect on the risk of stroke, and should be chosen with caution. Further methodological developments are needed to account for the dynamics of both BP and BPV over time, to clarify the specific role of BPV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Courson et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Secondary stroke prevention (n=6,105). Blood pressure variability was evaluated on First stroke recurrence (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.99-1.17). Advanced modeling of blood pressure variability showed a moderate positive association with stroke recurrence for a 5 mmHg increase (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.99-1.17), unlike standard methods.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: