Superiority of Out-of-Office Blood Pressure for Predicting Hypertensive Heart Disease in Non-Hispanic Black Adults.

Black Americans suffer disproportionately from hypertension and hypertensive heart disease. Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) is more predictive for cardiovascular complications than clinic BP; however, the relative abilities of clinic and out-of-office BP to predict left ventricular hypertrophy in black and white adults have not been established. Thus, we aimed to compare associations of out-of-office and clinic BP measurement with left ventricular hypertrophy by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging among non-Hispanic black and white adults. In this cross-sectional study, 1262 black and 927 white participants of the Dallas Heart Study ages 30 to 64 years underwent assessment of standardized clinic and out-of-office (research staff-obtained) BP and left ventricular mass index. In multivariable-adjusted analyses of treated and untreated participants, out-of-office BP was a stronger determinant of left ventricular hypertrophy than clinic BP (odds ratio per 10 mm Hg, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.34-1.64 for out-of-office systolic BP and 1.15 [1.04-1.28] for clinic systolic BP; 1.71 [1.43-2.05] for out-of-office diastolic BP, and 1.03 [0.86-1.24] for clinic diastolic BP). Non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity, treatment status, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction were also independent determinants of hypertrophy. Among treated Blacks, the differential association between out-of-office and clinic BP with hypertrophy was more pronounced than in treated white or untreated participants. In conclusion, protocol-driven supervised out-of-office BP monitoring provides important information that cannot be gleaned from clinic BP assessment alone. Our results underscore the importance of hypertension management programs outside the medical office to prevent hypertensive heart disease, especially in high-risk black adults. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00344903.

Expertise: no longer a sine qua non for guideline authors?

: Several sets of guidelines have been published recently and more are in the works. The very recent American College of Physicians/American Academy of Family Practitioners guidelines were put together by a set of authors and consultants without any expertise in the topic under discussion, that is, hypertension. Although we are not maintaining that all guidelines should be written exclusively by experts, complete lack of expertise among guideline authors is not acceptable.

Masked hypertension: understanding its complexity.

Masked hypertension, which is present when in-office normotension translates to out-of-office hypertension, is present in a surprisingly high percentage of untreated persons and an even higher percentage of patients after beginning antihypertensive medication. Not only are persons with prehypertension more likely to have masked hypertension than those with optimal blood pressure (BP), but also they frequently develop target organ damage prior to transitioning to sustained hypertension. Furthermore, the frequency of masked hypertension is high in individuals of African inheritance and in the presence of increased cardiovascular risk factors and disease states, such as diabetes and chronic renal failure. Nocturnal hypertension and non-dipping may be early markers of masked hypertension. Twenty-four hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), which can detect nighttime and 24 h elevated BP, remains the gold standard for diagnosing masked hypertension. Almost one-third of treated patients with masked hypertension remain as 'masked uncontrolled hypertension', and it becomes important, therefore, to use ABPM (and supplemental home BP monitoring) for the effective diagnosis and control of hypertension.

The Cardiovascular Risk of White-Coat Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: The role of white-coat hypertension (WCH) and the white-coat-effect (WCE) in development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: Using data from the population-based, 11-cohort IDACO (International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes), this study compared daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring with conventional blood pressure measurements in 653 untreated subjects with WCH and 653 normotensive control subjects. METHODS: European Society Hypertension guidelines were used as a 5-stage risk score. Low risk was defined as 0 to 2 risk factors, and high risk was defined as ≥3 to 5 risk factors, diabetes, and/or history of prior CVD events. Age- and cohort-matching was done between 653 untreated subjects with WCH and 653 normotensive control subjects. RESULTS: In a stepwise linear regression model, systolic WCE increased by 3.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1 to 4.6 mm Hg) per 10-year increase in age, and was similar in low- and high-risk subjects with or without prior CVD events. Over a median 10.6-year follow-up, incidence of new CVD events was higher in 159 high-risk subjects with WCH compared with 159 cohort- and age-matched high-risk normotensive subjects (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.10 to 3.84; p = 0.023). The HR was not significant for 494 participants with low-risk WCH and age-matched low-risk normotensive subjects. Subgroup analysis by age showed that an association between WCH and incident CVD events is limited to older (age ≥60 years) high-risk WCH subjects; the adjusted HR was 2.19 (95% CI: 1.09 to 4.37; p = 0.027) in the older high-risk group and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.51 to 1.53; p = 0.66) in the older low-risk group (p for interaction = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: WCE size is related to aging, not to CVD risk. CVD risk in most persons with WCH is comparable to age- and risk-adjusted normotensive control subjects.

Isolated systolic hypertension in young and middle-aged adults and 31-year risk for cardiovascular mortality: the Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry study.

BACKGROUND: Isolated systolic hypertension (ISH), defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) <90 mm Hg, in younger and middle-aged adults is increasing in prevalence. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) with ISH in younger and middle-aged adults. METHODS: CVD risks were explored in 15,868 men and 11,213 women 18 to 49 years of age (mean age 34 years) at baseline, 85% non-Hispanic white, free of coronary heart disease (CHD) and antihypertensive therapy, from the Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry study. Participant classifications were as follows: 1) optimal-normal blood pressure (BP) (SBP <130 mm Hg and DBP <85 mm Hg); 2) high-normal BP (130 to 139/85 to 89 mm Hg); 3) ISH; 4) isolated diastolic hypertension (SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP ≥90 mm Hg); and 5) systolic diastolic hypertension (SBP ≥140 mm Hg and DBP ≥90 mm Hg). RESULTS: During a 31-year average follow-up period (842,600 person-years), there were 1,728 deaths from CVD, 1,168 from CHD, and 223 from stroke. Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for age, race, education, body mass index, current smoking, total cholesterol, and diabetes. In men, with optimal-normal BP as the reference stratum, hazard ratios for CVD and CHD mortality risk for those with ISH were 1.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 1.46) and 1.28 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.58), respectively. ISH risks were similar to those with high-normal BP and less than those associated with isolated diastolic hypertension and systolic diastolic hypertension. In women with ISH, hazard ratios for CVD and CHD mortality risk were 1.55 (95% CI: 1.18 to 2.05) and 2.12 (95% CI: 1.49 to 3.01), respectively. ISH risks were higher than in those with high-normal BP or isolated diastolic hypertension and less than those associated with systolic diastolic hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Over long-term follow-up, younger and middle-aged adults with ISH had higher relative risk for CVD and CHD mortality than those with optimal-normal BP.

Does low diastolic blood pressure contribute to the risk of recurrent hypertensive cardiovascular disease events? The Framingham Heart Study.

Whether low diastolic blood pressure (DBP) is a risk factor for recurrent cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in persons with isolated systolic hypertension is controversial. We studied 791 individuals (mean age 75 years, 47% female, mean follow-up time: 8±6 years) with DBP <70 (n=225) versus 70 to 89 mm Hg (n=566) after initial CVD events in the original and offspring cohorts of the Framingham Heart Study. Recurrent CVD events occurred in 153 (68%) participants with lower DBP and 271 (48%) with higher DBP (P<0.0001). Risk of recurrent CVD events in risk factor-adjusted Cox regression was higher in those with DBP <70 mm Hg versus DBP 70 to 89 mm Hg in both treated (hazard ratio, 5.1 [95% confidence interval: 3.8-6.9] P<0.0001) and untreated individuals (hazard ratio, 11.7 [95% confidence interval: 6.5-21.1] P<0.0001; treatment interaction: P=0.71). Individually, coronary heart disease, heart failure, and stroke recurrent events were more likely with DBP <70 mm Hg versus 70 to 89 mm Hg (P<0.0001). To examine for an effect of wide pulse pressure on excess risk associated with low DBP, we defined 4 binary groupings of pulse pressure (≥68 versus <68 mm Hg) and DBP (<70 versus 70-89 mm Hg). CVD incidence rates were higher only in the group with pulse pressure ≥68 and DBP <70 mm Hg (76% versus 46%-54%; P<0.001). Persons with isolated systolic hypertension and prior CVD events have increased risk for recurrent CVD events in the presence of DBP <70 mm Hg versus DBP 70 to 89 mm Hg, whether treated or untreated, supporting wide pulse pressure as an important risk modifier for the adverse effect of low DBP.

Stroke outcomes among participants randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine or lisinopril in ALLHAT.

The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was a randomized, double-blind, practice-based, active-control, comparative effectiveness trial in 33,357 high-risk hypertensive participants. ALLHAT compared cardiovascular disease outcomes in participants initially treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril), a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), or a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone). We report stroke outcomes in 1517 participants in-trial and 1596 additional participants during post-trial passive surveillance, for a total follow-up of 8-13 years. Stroke rates were higher with lisinopril (6-year rate/100 = 6.4) than with chlorthalidone (5.8) or amlodipine (5.5) in-trial but not including post-trial (10-year rates/100 = 13.2 [chlorthalidone], 13.1[amlodipine], and 13.7 [lisinopril]). In-trial differences were driven by race (race-by-lisinopril/chlorthalidone interaction P = .005, race-by-amlodipine/lisinopril interaction P = .012) and gender (gender-by-lisinopril/amlodipine interaction P = .041), separately. No treatment differences overall, or by race or gender, were detected over the 10-year period. No differences appeared among treatment groups in adjusted risk of all-cause mortality including post-trial for participants with nonfatal in-trial strokes. Among Blacks and women, lisinopril was less effective in preventing stroke in-trial than either chlorthalidone or amlodipine, even after adjusting for differences in systolic blood pressure. These differences abated by the end of the post-trial period.