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.

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.

Effects of time-of-day of hypertension treatment on ambulatory blood pressure and clinical characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Generally, hypertensive patients ingest all their blood pressure (BP)-lowering agents in the morning. However, many published prospective trials have reported clinically meaningful morning-evening, treatment-time differences in BP-lowering efficacy, duration of action, and safety of most classes of hypertension medications, and it was recently documented that routine ingestion of ≥1 hypertension medications at bedtime, compared with ingestion of all of them upon awakening, significantly reduces cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. Non-dipping (<10% decline in asleep relative to awake BP mean), as determined by ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), is frequent in diabetes and is associated with increased CVD risk. Here, we investigated the influence of hypertension treatment-time regimen on the circadian BP pattern, degree of BP control, and relevant clinical and analytical parameters of hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes evaluated by 48-h ABPM. This cross-sectional study involved 2429 such patients (1465 men/964 women), 65.9 ± 10.6 (mean ± SD) yrs of age, enrolled in the Hygia Project, involving primary care centers of northwest Spain and designed to evaluate prospectively CVD risk by ABPM. Among the participants, 1176 were ingesting all BP-lowering medications upon awakening, whereas 1253 patients were ingesting ≥1 medications at bedtime. Among the latter, 336 patients were ingesting all BP-lowering medications at bedtime, whereas 917 were ingesting the full daily dose of some hypertension medications upon awakening and the full dose of others at bedtime. Those ingesting ≥1 medications at bedtime versus those ingesting all medications upon awakening had lower likelihood of metabolic syndrome and chronic kidney disease (CKD); had significantly lower albumin/creatinine ratio, glucose, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol; and had higher estimated glomerular filtration rate and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. Moreover, patients ingesting all medications at bedtime had lowest fasting glucose, serum creatinine, uric acid, and prevalence of proteinuria and CKD. Ingestion of ≥1 medications at bedtime was also significantly associated with lower asleep systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) means than treatment with all medications upon awakening. Sleep-time relative SBP and DBP decline was significantly attenuated in patients ingesting all medications upon awakening (p < .001). Thus, the prevalence of non-dipping was significantly higher when all hypertension medications were ingested upon awakening (68.6%) than when ≥1 of them was ingested at bedtime (55.8%; p < .001 between groups), and even further attenuated (49.7%) when all of them were ingested at bedtime (p < .001). Additionally, prevalence of the riser BP pattern, associated with highest CVD risk, was much greater (23.6%) among patients ingesting all medications upon awakening, compared with those ingesting some (20.0%) or all medications at bedtime (12.2%; p < .001 between groups). The latter group also showed significantly higher prevalence of properly controlled ambulatory BP (p < .001) that was achieved by a significantly lower number of hypertension medications (p < .001) compared with patients treated upon awakening. Our findings demonstrate significantly lower asleep SBP mean and attenuated prevalence of a blunted nighttime BP decline, i.e., lower prevalence of markers of CVD risk, and improved metabolic profile in patients with type 2 diabetes ingesting hypertension medications at bedtime than in those ingesting all of them upon awakening. These collective findings indicate that bedtime hypertension treatment, in conjunction with proper patient evaluation by ABPM to corroborate the diagnosis of hypertension and avoid treatment-induced nocturnal hypotension, should be the preferred therapeutic scheme for type 2 diabetes.