Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in adolescent untreated hypertensive patients.

Ambulatory blood pressure profiles were obtained with the portable semi-automatic blood pressure recorder Remler M2000 in groups of 20 adolescents, 20 young and 20 middle-aged adults and 20 elderly untreated patients, all considered by their physician to be hypertensive. It was found that adolescents who are hypertensive when seeing their physician are more often normotensive outside the physician's office than adult and elderly patients under similar conditions. The increased heart rate variability which was detected in adolescents was not associated with an enhanced blood pressure variability.

Ambulatory blood pressure measurement and antihypertensive therapy.

The traditional basis for assessing the effect of antihypertensive therapy is the blood pressure reading taken by a physician. However, several recent trials have been designed to evaluate the blood pressure lowering effect of various therapeutic agents during the patients' normal daytime activities, using a portable, semi-automatic blood pressure recorder. The results have shown that in a given patient, blood pressure measured at the physician's office often differs greatly from that prevailing during the rest of the day. This is true both in treated and untreated hypertensive patients. The difference between office and ambulatory recorded pressures cannot be predicted from blood pressure levels measured by the physician. Therefore, a prospective study was carried out in patients with diastolic blood pressures that were uncontrolled at the physician's office despite antihypertensive therapy. The purpose was to evaluate the response of recorded ambulatory blood pressure to treatment adjustments aimed at reducing office blood pressure below a pre-set target level. Only patients with high ambulatory blood pressures at the outset appeared to benefit from further changes in therapy. Thus, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring can be used to identify those patients who remain hypertensive only when facing the physician, despite antihypertensive therapy. Ambulatory monitoring could thus help to evaluate the efficacy of antihypertensive therapy and allow individual treatment.

Task force IV: Clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Participants of the 1999 Consensus Conference on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

OBJECTIVE: To reach a consensus on the clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: A task force on the clinical use of ABPM wrote this overview in preparation for the Seventh International Consensus Conference (23-25 September 1999, Leuven, Belgium). This article was amended to account for opinions aired at the conference and to reflect the common ground reached in the discussions. POINTS OF CONSENSUS: The Riva Rocci/Korotkoff technique, although it is prone to error, is easy and cheap to perform and remains worldwide the standard procedure for measuring blood pressure. ABPM should be performed only with properly validated devices as an accessory to conventional measurement of blood pressure. Ambulatory recording of blood pressure requires considerable investment in equipment and training and its use for screening purposes cannot be recommended. ABPM is most useful for identifying patients with white-coat hypertension (WCH), also known as isolated clinic hypertension, which is arbitrarily defined as a clinic blood pressure of more than 140 mmHg systolic or 90 mmHg diastolic in a patient with daytime ambulatory blood pressure below 135 mmHg systolic and 85 mmHg diastolic. Some experts consider a daytime blood pressure below 130 mmHg systolic and 80 mmHg diastolic optimal. Whether WCH predisposes subjects to sustained hypertension remains debated. However, outcome is better correlated to the ambulatory blood pressure than it is to the conventional blood pressure. Antihypertensive drugs lower the clinic blood pressure in patients with WCH but not the ambulatory blood pressure, and also do not improve prognosis. Nevertheless, WCH should not be left unattended. If no previous cardiovascular complications are present, treatment could be limited to follow-up and hygienic measures, which should also account for risk factors other than hypertension. ABPM is superior to conventional measurement of blood pressure not only for selecting patients for antihypertensive drug treatment but also for assessing the effects both of non-pharmacological and of pharmacological therapy. The ambulatory blood pressure should be reduced by treatment to below the thresholds applied for diagnosing sustained hypertension. ABPM makes the diagnosis and treatment of nocturnal hypertension possible and is especially indicated for patients with borderline hypertension, the elderly, pregnant women, patients with treatment-resistant hypertension and patients with symptoms suggestive of hypotension. In centres with sufficient financial resources, ABPM could become part of the routine assessment of patients with clinic hypertension. For patients with WCH, it should be repeated at annual or 6-monthly intervals. Variation of blood pressure throughout the day can be monitored only by ABPM, but several advantages of the latter technique can also be obtained by self-measurement of blood pressure, a less expensive method that is probably better suited to primary practice and use in developing countries. CONCLUSIONS: ABPM or equivalent methods for tracing the white-coat effect should become part of the routine diagnostic and therapeutic procedures applied to treated and untreated patients with elevated clinic blood pressures. Results of long-term outcome trials should better establish the advantage of further integrating ABPM as an accessory to conventional sphygmomanometry into the routine care of hypertensive patients and should provide more definite information on the long-term cost-effectiveness. Because such trials are not likely to be funded by the pharmaceutical industry, governments and health insurance companies should take responsibility in this regard.

Genetic architecture of ambulatory blood pressure in the general population: insights from cardiovascular gene-centric array.

Genetic determinants of blood pressure are poorly defined. We undertook a large-scale, gene-centric analysis to identify loci and pathways associated with ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure. We measured 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure in 2020 individuals from 520 white European nuclear families (the Genetic Regulation of Arterial Pressure of Humans in the Community Study) and genotyped their DNA using the Illumina HumanCVD BeadChip array, which contains ≈50 000 single nucleotide polymorphisms in >2000 cardiovascular candidate loci. We found a strong association between rs13306560 polymorphism in the promoter region of MTHFR and CLCN6 and mean 24-hour diastolic blood pressure; each minor allele copy of rs13306560 was associated with 2.6 mm Hg lower mean 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (P=1.2×10(-8)). rs13306560 was also associated with clinic diastolic blood pressure in a combined analysis of 8129 subjects from the Genetic Regulation of Arterial Pressure of Humans in the Community Study, the CoLaus Study, and the Silesian Cardiovascular Study (P=5.4×10(-6)). Additional analysis of associations between variants in gene ontology-defined pathways and mean 24-hour blood pressure in the Genetic Regulation of Arterial Pressure of Humans in the Community Study showed that cell survival control signaling cascades could play a role in blood pressure regulation. There was also a significant overrepresentation of rare variants (minor allele frequency: <0.05) among polymorphisms showing at least nominal association with mean 24-hour blood pressure indicating that a considerable proportion of its heritability may be explained by uncommon alleles. Through a large-scale gene-centric analysis of ambulatory blood pressure, we identified an association of a novel variant at the MTHFR/CLNC6 locus with diastolic blood pressure and provided new insights into the genetic architecture of blood pressure.

European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

Given the increasing use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in both clinical practice and hypertension research, a group of scientists, participating in the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability, in year 2013 published a comprehensive position paper dealing with all aspects of the technique, based on the available scientific evidence for ABPM. The present work represents an updated schematic summary of the most important aspects related to the use of ABPM in daily practice, and is aimed at providing recommendations for proper use of this technique in a clinical setting by both specialists and practicing physicians. The present article details the requirements and the methodological issues to be addressed for using ABPM in clinical practice, The clinical indications for ABPM suggested by the available studies, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension, are outlined in detail, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is discussed. The role of ABPM in pharmacological, epidemiological, and clinical research is also briefly mentioned. Finally, the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the situation of different countries with regard to the reimbursement and the availability of ABPM in primary care practices, hospital clinics, and pharmacies.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Adherence Monitoring: Diagnosing Pseudoresistant Hypertension.

A small proportion of the treated hypertensive population consistently has a blood pressure greater than 140/90 mm Hg despite a triple therapy including a diuretic, a calcium channel blocker, and a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system. According to guidelines, these patients have so-called resistant hypertension. The prevalence of this clinical condition is higher in tertiary than primary care centers and often is associated with chronic kidney disease, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea syndrome. Exclusion of pseudoresistant hypertension using ambulatory or home blood pressure monitoring is a crucial step in the investigation of patients with resistant hypertension. Thus, among the multiple factors to consider when investigating patients with resistant hypertension, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring should be performed very early. Among other factors to consider, physicians should investigate patient adherence to therapy, assess the adequacy of treatment, exclude interfering factors, and, finally, look for secondary forms of hypertension. Poor adherence to therapy accounts for 30% to 50% of cases of resistance to therapy depending on the methodology used to diagnose adherence problems. This review discusses the clinical factors implicated in the pathogenesis of resistant hypertension with a particular emphasis on pseudoresistance, drug adherence, and the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for the diagnosis and management of resistant hypertension.

Effect of immunisation against angiotensin II with CYT006-AngQb on ambulatory blood pressure: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase IIa study.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension can be controlled adequately with existing drugs such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. Nevertheless, treatment success is often restricted by patients not adhering to treatment. Immunisation against angiotensin II could solve this problem. We investigated the safety and efficacy of CYT006-AngQb-a vaccine based on a virus-like particle-that targets angiotensin II to reduce ambulatory blood pressure. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase IIa trial, 72 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomly assigned with a computer-generated randomisation list to receive subcutaneous injections of either 100 mug CYT006-AngQb (n=24), 300 mug CYT006-AngQb (24), or placebo (24), at weeks 0, 4, and 12. 24-h ambulatory blood pressure was measured before treatment and at week 14. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00500786. FINDINGS: Two patients in the 100 mug group, three in the 300 mug group, and none in the placebo group discontinued study treatment. All patients were included in safety analyses; efficacy analyses did not include the five dropouts, for whom no data were available at week 14. Five serious adverse events were reported (two in the 100 mug group, two in the 300 mug group, and one in the placebo group); none were deemed to be treatment related. Most side-effects were mild, transient reactions at the injection site. Mild, transient influenza-like symptoms were seen in three patients in the 100 mug group, seven in the 300 mug group, and none in the placebo group. In the 300 mug group, there was a reduction from baseline in mean ambulatory daytime blood pressure at week 14 by -9.0/-4.0 mm Hg compared with placebo (p=0.015 for systolic and 0.064 for diastolic). The 300 mug dose reduced the early morning blood-pressure surge compared with placebo (change at 0800 h -25/-13 mm Hg; p<0.0001 for systolic, p=0.0035 for diastolic). INTERPRETATION: Immunisation with CYT006-AngQb was associated with no serious adverse events; most observed adverse events were consistent with local or systemic responses similar to those seen with other vaccines. The 300 mug dose reduced blood pressure in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension during the daytime, especially in the early morning. FUNDING: Cytos Biotechnology AG.

Are some hypertensive patients overtreated? A prospective study of ambulatory blood pressure recording.

Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was recorded in hypertensive patients whose physicians had been asked to reduce diastolic pressure measured in the office to 90 mm Hg or less. 34 hypertensive patients with a diastolic pressure measured by their physician of 95 mm Hg or more despite antihypertensive therapy had their treatment changed with the aim of achieving this pre-set goal within 3 months. At the beginning and the end of the study, ambulatory BP was monitored during the daytime with a portable non-invasive recorder. The results of the ambulatory recordings were not made available to the physicians until completion of the study. In half the patients the ambulatory diastolic pressure was already 90 mm Hg or less at the start. In these patients, treatment adjustment did not further decrease ambulatory BP. In contrast, patients who initially had an ambulatory diastolic pressure above 90 mm Hg had a significantly decreased ambulatory BP at the end of the study. Intensifying the therapy of hypertensive patients who have a normal ambulatory BP may result in overtreatment without any real gain in BP control.

High heritability of ambulatory blood pressure in families of East African descent.

We estimated the heritability of ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and pulse pressure (PP) in east African families with at least 2 hypertensive siblings and living in the Seychelles islands (Indian Ocean). The sample consisted of 314 individuals (147 men and 167 women), both normotensive and hypertensive, from 76 pedigrees (mean+/-SD of 4.1+/-2.8 persons per pedigree). After a 2-week off-treatment period, daytime and nighttime ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was monitored. Office BP was measured with a standard mercury sphygmomanometer. We estimated by maximum likelihood the age- and sex-adjusted heritabilities from the additive polygenic component of the variance of the traits allowing for the presence of other familial correlations. We also adjusted for ascertainment (ie, for the fact that 2 siblings had to be hypertensive) and examined the effect of adjusting for body mass index, 24-hour urinary excretion of sodium and potassium, plasma renin activity, and plasma aldosterone concentration. Heritability estimates (+/-SE) for ambulatory SBP, DBP, and PP were, respectively, 0.37+/-0.12/0.24+/-0.12/0.54+/-0.12 for daytime and 0.34+/-0.13/ 0.37+/-0.15/0.47+/-0.12 for nighttime measurements (P<0.05 for all estimates). Heritability estimates for office SBP, DBP, and PP were, respectively, 0.20+/-0.11, 0.05+/-0.09, and 0.37+/-0.12. Heritability estimates for SBP varied markedly according to whether participants were treated for hypertension at baseline. The present data show that ambulatory BP and PP have a high heritability in families of African descent. They also demonstrate that antihypertensive treatment and the number of BP measurements have a major influence on the heritability estimates.

Effect of weight reduction in moderately overweight patients on recorded ambulatory blood pressure and free cytosolic platelet calcium.

Although platelet cytosolic calcium has been shown to decrease during pharmacological treatment of hypertension, there is no evidence that cytosolic calcium also falls during a nonpharmacological reduction in blood pressure. To provide such evidence, we examined prospectively the relation between platelet cytosolic calcium and ambulatory blood pressure during weight reduction in moderately overweight (body mass index [BMI] greater than 25), mildly hypertensive individuals. The experimental group (responders: BMI reduction greater than 5%) consisted of 19 patients who lost 8.5 +/- 2.9 kg (mean +/- SD, p less than 0.05) during a 10-week hypocaloric diet, whereas the control group (nonresponders: BMI reduction less than 5%) consisted of 12 patients who showed no relevant change in body weight (-2.0 +/- 1.3 kg) during the same period of time. The moderate weight loss of the responders decreased blood pressure by 14/5 mm Hg (p less than 0.05), as measured by ambulatory monitoring, which renders a placebo effect unlikely. This nonpharmacological reduction in blood pressure was accompanied by a proportional 11% decrease (p less than 0.05) in platelet cytosolic calcium and also by significant (p less than 0.05) decreases in plasma catecholamines and serum cholesterol. These findings establish the concept of a nonpharmacological reduction in free cytosolic platelet calcium in humans and add further evidence suggesting a link between intracellular calcium homeostasis and blood pressure regulation.

Use of non-invasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to screen for high-risk hypertensive patients.

Blood pressures measured casually by a doctor often differ considerably from those recorded during everyday activities away from the medical environment. In the present study, we compared office and ambulatory recorded pressures in 475 consecutive untreated patients diagnosed hypertensive by physicians. Blood pressure monitored non-invasively during the day was, on average 15/7 mmHg lower than the corresponding office pressures. The difference between office and ambulatory recorded pressure tended to be greatest in those patients with the highest office blood pressure levels, although the relationship between the two types of measurement was too weak (r = 0.50 and 0.38 for systolic and diastolic pressure, respectively) to have any predictive value in the individual patient. Office blood pressures were at least 10 mmHg higher than ambulatory pressures in 62% of patients for systolic and 42% for diastolic pressure. Blood pressure levels recorded during ambulatory monitoring were higher than in the doctor's office for 18% of patients for systolic and 22% for diastolic pressure. Among patients with systolic pressures of between 161 and 180 mmHg or diastolic pressures between 96 and 105 mmHg when facing a doctor, 27 and 37% respectively, showed markedly lower systolic (less than 140 mmHg) or diastolic (less than 90 mmHg) ambulatory recorded pressures. These data therefore indicate that ambulatory blood pressure monitoring may help to identify those truly hypertensive patients who are most likely to benefit from antihypertensive therapy.

Discrepancies between office and ambulatory blood pressure: clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials have documented no benefit from small reductions in blood pressure measured in the clinical office. However, ambulatory blood pressure is a better predictor of cardiovascular events than office-based blood pressure. We assessed control of ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: We selected 4729 patients from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry. Patients were aged >/=55 years and presented with at least one of the following co-morbidities: coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes with end-organ damage. An average of 2 measures of blood pressure in the office was used for analyses. Also, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure was recorded at 20-minute intervals with a SpaceLabs 90207 device. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 69.6 (+/-8.2) years, and 60.8% of them were male. Average time from the diagnosis of hypertension to recruitment into the Registry was 10.9 (+/-8.4) years. Mean blood pressure in the office was 152.3/82.3 mm Hg, and mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure was 133.3/72.4 mm Hg. About 60% of patients with an office-pressure of 130-139/85-89 mm Hg, 42.4% with office-pressure of 140-159/90-99 mm Hg, and 23.3% with office-pressure > or =160/100 mm Hg were actually normotensive, according to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure criteria (<130/80 mm Hg). CONCLUSION: We suggest that the lack of benefit of antihypertensive therapy in some trials may partly be due to some patients having normal pressure at trial baseline. Ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure may allow for a better assessment of trial eligibility.

Is nurse-measured blood pressure a valid substitute for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring?

BACKGROUND: Because ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is not available everywhere, the objective of the study was to determine whether nurse-measured blood pressure could be an acceptable substitute to ABPM. METHODS: We analyzed the data of 2385 consecutive patients referred to our hypertension clinic for the performance of ABPM. Before ambulatory monitoring was performed, a nurse-measured BP was obtained three times using a Y-tube connecting the sphygmomanometer and the recorder. We compared the mean value of the three nurse-measured blood pressures with that of the 12h daytime ambulatory monitoring, considered as the reference. RESULTS: The difference between the nurse-measured and the ambulatory blood pressure was small but statistically significant, indicating that nurse-measured blood pressure tends to overestimate both diastolic and systolic blood pressure. The difference between the nurse blood pressure and ABPM was greater among treated hypertensive patients than untreated patients. To diagnose hypertension, defined as a blood pressure of over 140/90mmHg by ABPM, the positive predictive value of the nurse blood pressure was 0.81 and the negative predictive value 0.63. However, these predictive values could be improved with less stringent cut-off values of blood pressure. Thus, for a diastolic blood pressure above 100mmHg, the positive predictive value of nurse blood pressure was 0.55 and the negative predictive value 0.91. These figures were relatively similar for previously treated and untreated patients. CONCLUSION: Nurse blood pressure is less accurate than ABPM in diagnosing hypertension, defined as a blood pressure of over 140/90mmHg. It could, however, be an acceptable substitute, especially to exclude people who do not need to be treated, in situations where lower resources require a less rigorous definition of hypertension.