Association of left ventricular structural and functional abnormalities with aortic and brachial blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients: the SAFAR study.

Both brachial blood pressure (BP) level and its variability (BPV) significantly associate with left ventricular (LV) structure and function. Recent studies indicate that aortic BP is superior to brachial BP in the association with LV abnormalities. However, it remains unknown whether aortic BPV better associate with LV structural and functional abnormalities. We therefore aimed to investigate and compare aortic versus brachial BPV, in terms of the identification of LV abnormalities. Two hundred and three participants who underwent echocardiography were included in this study. Twenty-four-hour aortic and brachial ambulatory BP was measured simultaneously by a validated BP monitor (Mobil-O-Graph, Stolberg, Germany) and BPV was calculated with validated formulae. LV mass and LV diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) were evaluated by echocardiography. The prevalence of LV hypertrophy (LVH) and LVDD increased significantly with BPV indices (P⩽0.04) in trend tests. After adjustment to potential confounders, only aortic average real variability (ARV), but not brachial ARV or weighted s.d. (wSD, neither aortic nor brachial) significantly associated with LV mass index (P=0.02). Similar results were observed in logistic regression. After adjustment, only aortic ARV significantly associated with LVH (odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.28 (1.08, 4.82)). As for LVDD, neither the brachial nor the aortic 24-hour wSD, but the aortic and brachial ARV, associated with LVDD significantly, with OR=2.28 (95% CI: (1.03, 5.02)) and OR=2.36 (95% CI: (1.10, 5.05)), respectively. In summary, aortic BPV, especially aortic ARV, seems to be superior to brachial BPV in the association of LV structural and functional abnormalities.

Association of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction with 24-h aortic ambulatory blood pressure: the SAFAR study.

Aortic blood pressure (BP) and 24-h ambulatory BP are both better associated with target organ damage than office brachial BP. However, it remains unclear whether a combination of these two techniques would be the optimal methodology to evaluate patients' BP in terms of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) prevention. In 230 participants, office brachial and aortic BPs were measured by a validated BP monitor and a tonometry-based device, respectively. 24-h ambulatory brachial and aortic BPs were measured by a validated ambulatory BP monitor (Mobil-O-Graph, Germany). Systematic assessment of patients' LVDD was performed. After adjustment for age, gender, hypertension and antihypertensive treatment, septum and lateral E/Ea were significantly associated with office aortic systolic BP (SBP) and pulse pressure (PP) and 24-h brachial and aortic SBP and PP (P ⩽ 0.04), but not with office brachial BP (P ⩾ 0.09). Similarly, 1 standard deviation in SBP was significantly associated with 97.8 ± 20.9, 86.4 ± 22.9, 74.1 ± 23.3 and 51.3 ± 22.6 in septum E/Ea and 68.6 ± 2 0.1, 54.2 ± 21.9, 37.9 ± 22.4 and 23.1 ± 21.4 in lateral E/Ea, for office and 24-h aortic and brachial SBP, respectively. In qualitative analysis, except for office brachial BP, office aortic and 24-h brachial and aortic BPs were all significantly associated with LVDD (P ⩽ 0.03), with the highest odds ratio in 24-h aortic SBP. Furthermore, aortic BP, no matter in the office or 24-h ambulatory setting, showed the largest area under receiver operating characteristic curves (P ⩽ 0.02). In conclusion, 24-h aortic BP is superior to other BPs in the association with LVDD.