Cardiovascular disease risk stratification by the Framigham score is markedly improved by ambulatory compared with office blood pressure.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) better predicts cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes than office BP measurements (OBPM). Nonetheless, current CVD risk stratification models continue to rely on exclusively daytime OBPM along with traditional factors, eg, age, sex, smoking, dyslipidemia, and/or diabetes. METHODS: Data from 19 949 participants of the primary care-based Hygia Project assessed by 48-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and without prior CVD events were used to compare the diagnostic accuracy, discrimination, and performance of the original Framingham risk score (RSOFG) and its adjusted version to the Hygia Project study population (RSAFG) with that of a novel CVD risk stratification model constructed by replacing OBPM with ABPM-derived prognostic parameters (RSABPM). RESULTS: During the follow-up, lasting up to 12.7 years, 1854 participants experienced a primary CVD outcome of CVD death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, heart failure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, angina pectoris, or peripheral artery disease. Asleep systolic BP (SBP) mean and sleep-time relative SBP decline were the only joint significant ABPM-derived predictive factors of CVD risk and were therefore used to substitute for in-clinic SBP in the RSABPM model. The RSABPM model, in comparison with the RSOFG and RSAFG models, showed significantly improved calibration, diagnostic accuracy, discrimination, and performance (always P<.001). The RSAFG-derived event-probabilities of 57.3% of the participants were outside the 95% confidence limits of the event probability determined by the RSABPM model. CONCLUSIONS: These collective findings reveal important limitations of CVD risk stratification when based upon OBPM, as in the Framingham score, and corroborate the clinical value of around-the-clock ABPM to properly diagnose true hypertension and reliably stratify CVD vulnerability.

The Hygia Project and Hygia Chronotherapy Trial: insights of we clinical investigators on the impact of the embedded continuing medical education on primary-care practice and improved patient cardiovascular health.

The participating doctors of the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial (HCT) are aware of the criticisms of its published findings, which have been unjustifiably misrepresented in letters to the editors and commentaries, perhaps because of lack of understanding of the foundations of the Hygia Project, in which the HCT is nested. Thus, our purpose through this communication is to highlight the unique features of the Hygia Project and HCT in terms of: (i) organization, management, and quality control, (ii) physician training/continuing medical education, and (iii) impact on every-day primary-care clinical practice specifically improved patient care through 48 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to diagnose and optimally manage by bedtime hypertension chronotherapy true arterial hypertension to markedly improve the cardiovascular health of our patients.

Bedtime hypertension chronotherapy best reduces cardiovascular disease risk as corroborated by the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial. Rebuttal to European Society of Hypertension officials.

Reinhold Kreutz and colleagues in a recent editorial claim the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial lacks credibility because of deficient methods, thereby dismissing both the plausibility and clinical significance of its reported findings. They misstate and misrepresent crucial information, findings and conclusions unambiguously detailed in the published report of the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial. The purpose of this communication is to provide a complete rebuttal to each and every one of the misleading and scientifically unsupported claims by Kreutz et al. that calls into question their expertise to decry the merits, advantages, limitations and validity of correctly designed and conducted ambulatory blood pressure monitoring-based chronotherapy trials.

Bedtime hypertension treatment improves cardiovascular risk reduction: the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial.

AIMS: The Hygia Chronotherapy Trial, conducted within the clinical primary care setting, was designed to test whether bedtime in comparison to usual upon awakening hypertension therapy exerts better cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicentre, controlled, prospective endpoint trial, 19 084 hypertensive patients (10 614 men/8470 women, 60.5 ± 13.7 years of age) were assigned (1:1) to ingest the entire daily dose of ≥1 hypertension medications at bedtime (n = 9552) or all of them upon awakening (n = 9532). At inclusion and at every scheduled clinic visit (at least annually) throughout follow-up, ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring was performed for 48 h. During the 6.3-year median patient follow-up, 1752 participants experienced the primary CVD outcome (CVD death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, heart failure, or stroke). Patients of the bedtime, compared with the upon-waking, treatment-time regimen showed significantly lower hazard ratio-adjusted for significant influential characteristics of age, sex, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, smoking, HDL cholesterol, asleep systolic blood pressure (BP) mean, sleep-time relative systolic BP decline, and previous CVD event-of the primary CVD outcome [0.55 (95% CI 0.50-0.61), P < 0.001] and each of its single components (P < 0.001 in all cases), i.e. CVD death [0.44 (0.34-0.56)], myocardial infarction [0.66 (0.52-0.84)], coronary revascularization [0.60 (0.47-0.75)], heart failure [0.58 (0.49-0.70)], and stroke [0.51 (0.41-0.63)]. CONCLUSION: Routine ingestion by hypertensive patients of ≥1 prescribed BP-lowering medications at bedtime, as opposed to upon waking, results in improved ABP control (significantly enhanced decrease in asleep BP and increased sleep-time relative BP decline, i.e. BP dipping) and, most importantly, markedly diminished occurrence of major CVD events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00741585.

Asleep blood pressure: significant prognostic marker of vascular risk and therapeutic target for prevention.

Aims: Sleep-time blood pressure (BP) is a stronger risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events than awake and 24 h BP means, but the potential role of asleep BP as therapeutic target for diminishing CVD risk is uncertain. We investigated whether CVD risk reduction is most associated with progressive decrease of either office or ambulatory awake or asleep BP mean. Methods and results: We prospectively evaluated 18 078 individuals with baseline ambulatory BP ranging from normotension to hypertension. At inclusion and at scheduled visits (mainly annually) during follow-up, ambulatory BP was measured for 48 consecutive hours. During the 5.1-year median follow-up, 2311 individuals had events, including 1209 experiencing the primary outcome (composite of CVD death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, heart failure, and stroke). The asleep systolic blood pressure (SBP) mean was the most significant BP-derived risk factor for the primary outcome [hazard ratio 1.29 (95% CI) 1.22-1.35 per SD elevation, P < 0.001], regardless of office [1.03 (0.97-1.09), P = 0.32], and awake SBP [1.02 (0.94-1.10), P = 0.68]. Most important, the progressive attenuation of asleep SBP was the most significant marker of event-free survival [0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.82) per SD decrease, P < 0.001], regardless of changes in office [1.07 (0.97-1.17), P = 0.18], or awake SBP mean [0.96 (0.85-1.08), P = 0.47] during follow-up. Conclusion: Asleep SBP is the most significant BP-derived risk factor for CVD events. Furthermore, treatment-induced decrease of asleep, but not awake SBP, a novel hypertension therapeutic target requiring periodic patient evaluation by ambulatory monitoring, is associated with significantly lower risk for CVD morbidity and mortality.

Circadian pattern of ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients with and without type 2 diabetes.

There is strong association between diabetes and increased risk of end-organ damage, stroke, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Non-dipping (<10% decline in the asleep relative to awake blood pressure [BP] mean), as determined by ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), is frequent in diabetes and consistently associated with increased CVD risk. The reported prevalence of non-dipping in diabetes is highly variable, probably due to differences in the study groups (normotensive subjects, untreated hypertensives, treated hypertensives), relatively small sample sizes, reliance only on a single, low-reproducibility, 24-h ABPM evaluation per participant, and definition of daytime and nighttime periods by arbitrary selected fixed clock-hour spans. Accordingly, we evaluated the influence of diabetes on the circadian BP pattern by 48-h ABPM (rather than for 24 h to increase reproducibility of results) during which participants maintained a diary listing times of going to bed at night and awakening in the morning. This cross-sectional study involved 12 765 hypertensive patients (6797 men/5968 women), 58.1 ± 14.1 (mean ± SD) yrs of age, enrolled in the Hygia Project, designed to evaluate prospectively CVD risk by ABPM in primary care centers of northwest Spain. Among the participants, 2954 (1799 men/1155 women) had type 2 diabetes. At the time of study, 525/3314 patients with/without diabetes were untreated for hypertension, and the remaining 2429/6497 patients with/without diabetes were treated. Hypertension was defined as awake systolic (SBP)/diastolic (DBP) BP mean ≥135/85 mm Hg, or asleep SBP/DBP mean ≥120/70 mm Hg, or BP-lowering treatment. Hypertensive patients with than without diabetes were more likely to be men and of older age, have diagnoses of microalbuminuria, proteinuria, chronic kidney disease, obstructive sleep apnea, metabolic syndrome, and/or obesity, plus higher glucose, creatinine, uric acid, and triglycerides, but lower cholesterol and estimated glomerular filtration rate. In patients with diabetes, ambulatory SBP was significantly elevated (p < .001), mainly during the hours of nighttime sleep and initial hours after morning awakening, independent of presence/absence of BP-lowering treatment. Ambulatory DBP, however, was significantly higher (p < .001) in patients without diabetes, mainly during the daytime. Differing trends for SBP and DBP between groups resulted in large differences in ambulatory pulse pressure (PP), it being significantly greater (p < .001) throughout the entire 24 h in patients with diabetes, even after correcting for age. Prevalence of non-dipping was significantly higher in patients with than without diabetes (62.1% vs. 45.9%; p < .001). Largest difference between groups was in the prevalence of the riser BP pattern, i.e., asleep SBP mean greater than awake SBP mean (19.9% vs. 8.1% in patients with and without diabetes, respectively; p < .001). Elevated asleep SBP mean was the major basis for the diagnosis of hypertension and/or inadequate BP control among patients with diabetes; thus, among the uncontrolled hypertensive patients with diabetes, 89.2% had nocturnal hypertension. Our findings document significantly elevated prevalence of a blunted nocturnal BP decline in hypertensive patients with diabetes. Most important, prevalence of the riser BP pattern, associated with highest CVD risk among all possible BP patterns, was more than twice as prevalent in diabetes. Patients with diabetes also presented significantly elevated ambulatory PP, reflecting increased arterial stiffness and enhanced CVD risk. These collective findings indicate that diabetes should be included among the clinical conditions for which ABPM is recommended for proper CVD risk assessment.

Prevalence and clinical characteristics of isolated-office and true resistant hypertension determined by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

Hypertension is defined as resistant to treatment when a therapeutic plan including ≥3 hypertension medications failed to sufficiently lower systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressures (BPs). Most individuals, including those under hypertension therapy, show a "white-coat" effect that could cause an overestimation of their real BP. The prevalence and clinical characteristics of "white-coat" or isolated-office resistant hypertension (RH) has always been evaluated by comparing clinic BP values with either daytime home BP measurements or the awake BP mean obtained from ambulatory monitoring (ABPM), therefore including patients with either normal or elevated asleep BP mean. Here, we investigated the impact of including asleep BP mean as a requirement for the definition of hypertension on the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and estimated cardiovascular (CVD) risk of isolated-office RH. This cross-sectional study evaluated 3042 patients treated with ≥3 hypertension medications and evaluated by 48-h ABPM (1707 men/1335 women), 64.2 ± 11.6 (mean ± SD) yrs of age, enrolled in the Hygia Project. Among the participants, 522 (17.2%) had true isolated-office RH (elevated clinic BP and controlled awake and asleep ambulatory BPs while treated with 3 hypertension medications), 260 (8.6%) had false isolated-office RH (elevated clinic BP, controlled awake SBP/DBP means, but elevated asleep SBP or DBP mean while treated with 3 hypertension medications), and the remaining 2260 (74.3%) had true RH (elevated awake or asleep SBP/DBP means while treated with 3 medications, or any patient treated with ≥4 medications). Patients with false, relative to those with true, isolated-office RH had higher prevalence of microalbuminuria and chronic kidney disease (CKD), significantly higher albumin/creatinine ratio (p < .001), significantly higher 48-h SBP/DBP means by 9.6/5.3 mm Hg (p < .001), significantly lower sleep-time relative SBP and DBP decline (p < .001), and significantly greater prevalence of a non-dipper BP profile (96.9% vs. 38.9%; p < .001). Additionally, the prevalence of the riser BP pattern, which is associated with highest CVD risk, was much greater, 40.4% vs. 5.0% (p < .001), among patients with false isolated-office RH. The estimated hazard ratio of CVD events, using a fully adjusted model including the significant confounding variables of sex, age, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, asleep SBP mean, and sleep-time relative SBP decline, was significantly greater for patients with false compared with those with true isolated-office RH (2.13 [95% confidence interval: 1.95-2.32]; p < .001). Patients with false isolated-office hypertension and true RH, however, were equivalent for the prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea, metabolic syndrome, obesity, diabetes, microalbuminuria, and chronic kidney disease, and they had an equivalent estimated hazard ratio of CVD events (1.04 [95% confidence interval: .97-1.12]; p = .265). Our findings document a significantly elevated prevalence of a blunted nighttime BP decline in patients here categorized as either false isolated-office RH and true RH, jointly accounting for 82.8% of the studied sample. Previous reports of much lower prevalence of true RH plus a nonsignificant increased CVD risk of this condition compared with isolated-office RH are misleading by disregarding asleep BP mean for classification. Our results further indicate that classification of RH patients into categories of isolated-office RH, masked RH, and true RH cannot be based on the comparison of clinic BP with either daytime home BP measurements or awake BP mean from ABPM, as so far customary in the available literature, totally disregarding the highly significant prognostic value of nighttime BP. Accordingly, ABPM should be regarded as a clinical requirement for proper diagnosis of true RH.