Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques

Aletta E Schutte, Anastasios Kollias, George S Stergiou, Aletta E Schutte, Anastasios Kollias, George S Stergiou

Abstract

Current hypertension guidelines recommend using the average values of several blood pressure (BP) readings obtained both in and out of the office for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. In-office BP measurement using an upper-arm cuff constitutes the evidence-based reference method for current BP classification and treatment targets. However, out-of-office BP evaluation using 24 h ambulatory or home BP monitoring is recommended by all major medical associations for obtaining further insights into the BP profile of an individual and how it relates to their daily activities. Importantly, the highly variable nature of office and out-of-office BP readings has been widely acknowledged, including the association of BP variability with cardiovascular outcomes. However, to date, the implications of BP variability on cardiovascular outcomes have largely been ignored, with limited application in clinical practice. Novel cuffless wearable technologies might provide a detailed assessment of the 24 h BP profile and behaviour over weeks or months. These devices offer many advantages for researchers and patients compared with traditional BP monitors, but their accuracy and utility remain uncertain. In this Review, we outline and compare conventional and novel methods and techniques for assessing average BP levels and BP variability, and reflect on the utility and potential of these methods for improving the treatment and management of patients with hypertension.

Conflict of interest statement

A.E.S. has received speaker honoraria from Omron and IEM and has conducted accuracy studies for Aktiia. A.K. has contributed to validation studies for InBody and Microlife. G.S.S. has conducted research for and advised Huawei, InBody and Microlife.

© 2022. Springer Nature Limited.

Figures

Fig. 1. History of blood pressure assessment…
Fig. 1. History of blood pressure assessment and technology development.
a | The timeline depicts the key milestones in the history of blood pressure (BP) measurement, beginning with the first recorded measurement of BP levels, performed in a horse in 1733. b | The number of registered patents with the words ‘blood pressure’ in their title has risen steadily since 1897. The data for the graph were extracted from www.scopus.com. ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring.
Fig. 2. Short-term and long-term blood pressure…
Fig. 2. Short-term and long-term blood pressure variability.
Blood pressure (BP) patterns are evident across both the short term and the long term, with overall higher BP levels in colder versus warmer months, in daytime versus the night-time and during exposure to acutely stressful events. The different ranges of BP variability are presented in two individuals (with BP readings shown as red and blue circles) over seconds, hours and months.
Fig. 3. The concept of time at…
Fig. 3. The concept of time at target blood pressure levels.
As blood pressure (BP) levels increase with age, the systolic BP of two individuals (depicted by the red and blue lines) might present similar average levels (black line), but owing to a greater BP load, the individual with the BP depicted by the red line will have a greater risk of cardiovascular disease over their lifetime. Adapted with permission from ref., Wolters Kluwer.
Fig. 4. Advantages and disadvantages of classic…
Fig. 4. Advantages and disadvantages of classic and novel blood pressure monitoring methods and capacity to capture blood pressure variability.
Blood pressure (BP) monitoring methods enable the assessment of BP during static or dynamic conditions over different time windows, and thus can capture different aspects of BP variability.
Fig. 5. Capacity of classic blood pressure…
Fig. 5. Capacity of classic blood pressure monitoring methods to assess blood pressure variability.
Classic methods to measure blood pressure (BP) are inadequate to capture BP variability across the spectrum of very short-term to long-term variability.

References

    1. Booth J. A short history of blood pressure measurement. Proc. R. Soc. Med. 1977;70:793–799.
    1. No Authors Listed. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension. Results in patients with diastolic blood pressures averaging 115 through 129 mm Hg. JAMA. 1967;202:1028–1034. doi: 10.1001/jama.1967.03130240070013.
    1. Lewis CE, et al. Final report of a trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N. Engl. J. Med. 2021;384:1921–1930. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1901281.
    1. Kallioinen N, Hill A, Horswill MS, Ward HE, Watson MO. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review. J. Hypertens. 2017;35:421–441. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001197.
    1. Unger T, et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension. 2020;75:1334–1357. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.15026.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 2021;39:1293–1302. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002843.
    1. Stergiou GS, Parati G. How to best assess blood pressure? The ongoing debate on the clinical value of blood pressure average and variability. Hypertension. 2011;57:1041–1042. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.172924.
    1. Stevens SL, et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016;354:i4098. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4098.
    1. GBD. 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396:1223–1249. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2.
    1. World Health Organization. WHO technical specifications for automated non-invasive blood pressure measuring devices with cuff. (Geneva, 2020).
    1. Whelton PK, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension. 2018;71:e13–e115.
    1. Williams B, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 2018;36:1953–2041. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001940.
    1. Adler A, et al. Pharmacological blood pressure lowering for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease across different levels of blood pressure: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet. 2021;397:1625–1636. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00590-0.
    1. Turnbull F. Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectively-designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet. 2003;362:1527–1535. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14739-3.
    1. Padwal R, et al. Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group. J. Hypertens. 2019;37:1737–1745. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002112.
    1. Sharman JE, et al. Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressure. J. Hypertens. 2020;38:21–29. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002246.
    1. Picone DS, et al. Nonvalidated home blood pressure devices dominate the online marketplace in Australia: major implications for cardiovascular risk management. Hypertension. 2020;75:1593–1599. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.14719.
    1. Ayman D, Goldshire AD. Blood pressure determination by patients with hypertension: the difference between clinic and home readings before treatment. Am. J. Med. Sci. 1940;200:465–474. doi: 10.1097/00000441-194010000-00005.
    1. Mancia G, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, Cuspidi C, Grassi G. White-coat hypertension: pathophysiological and clinical aspects: excellence award for hypertension research 2020. Hypertension. 2021;78:1677–1688. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.16489.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. Phenotypes of masked hypertension: isolated ambulatory, isolated home and dual masked hypertension. J. Hypertens. 2020;38:218–223. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002270.
    1. Chida Y, Steptoe A. Greater cardiovascular responses to laboratory mental stress are associated with poor subsequent cardiovascular risk status: a meta-analysis of prospective evidence. Hypertension. 2010;55:1026–1032. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.146621.
    1. Mancia G, Verdecchia P. Clinical value of ambulatory blood pressure: evidence and limits. Circ. Res. 2015;116:1034–1045. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.303755.
    1. Parati G, et al. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J. Hypertens. 2014;32:1359–1366. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000221.
    1. Kario K, et al. Morning surge in blood pressure as a predictor of silent and clinical cerebrovascular disease in elderly hypertensives: a prospective study. Circulation. 2003;107:1401–1406. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000056521.67546.AA.
    1. Rothwell PM, et al. Prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure, and episodic hypertension. Lancet. 2010;375:895–905. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60308-X.
    1. Schutte AE, Gnanenthiran SR. Toward a better understanding of why cumulative blood pressure is such a strong predictor of cardiovascular outcomes. Hypertension. 2021;78:1267–1269. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.18156.
    1. Kishi S, et al. Cumulative blood pressure in early adulthood and cardiac dysfunction in middle age: the CARDIA study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2015;65:2679–2687. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.042.
    1. Teramoto K, et al. Mid- to late-life time-averaged cumulative blood pressure and late-life cardiac structure, function, and heart failure. Hypertension. 2020;76:808–818. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.14833.
    1. Chung SC, et al. Time spent at blood pressure target and the risk of death and cardiovascular diseases. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0202359. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202359.
    1. Fatani N, Dixon DL, Van Tassell BW, Fanikos J, Buckley LF. Systolic blood pressure time in target range and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with hypertension. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021;77:1290–1299. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.014.
    1. Stergiou GS, Kollias A, Protogerou AD. Evidence on blood pressure measurement methodology and clinical implementation: research agenda for the 21st century. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2017;70:587–589. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.06.026.
    1. Parati G, Pomidossi G, Albini F, Malaspina D, Mancia G. Relationship of 24-h blood pressure mean and variability to severity of target-organ damage in hypertension. J. Hypertens. 1987;5:93–98. doi: 10.1097/00004872-198702000-00013.
    1. Frattola A, Parati G, Cuspidi C, Albini F, Mancia G. Prognostic value of 24-h blood pressure variability. J. Hypertens. 1993;11:1133–1137. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199310000-00019.
    1. Picone DS, et al. Accuracy of cuff-measured blood pressure: systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2017;70:572–586. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.064.
    1. Kollias A, Lagou S, Zeniodi ME, Boubouchairopoulou N, Stergiou GS. Association of central versus brachial blood pressure with target-organ damage: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension. 2016;67:183–190. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.115.06066.
    1. Vlachopoulos C, et al. Prediction of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality with central haemodynamics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Heart J. 2010;31:1865–1871. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq024.
    1. Sharman JE, et al. Validation of non-invasive central blood pressure devices: ARTERY Society Task Force consensus statement on protocol standardization. Eur. Heart J. 2017;38:2805–2812. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw632.
    1. Yu S, et al. 24-h aortic blood pressure variability showed a stronger association with carotid damage than 24-h brachial blood pressure variability: The SAFAR study. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2018;20:499–507. doi: 10.1111/jch.13226.
    1. Chi C, et al. Association of left ventricular structural and functional abnormalities with aortic and brachial blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients: the SAFAR study. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2017;31:633–639. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2017.37.
    1. de la Sierra A, et al. Central blood pressure variability is increased in hypertensive patients with target organ damage. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2018;20:266–272. doi: 10.1111/jch.13172.
    1. Parati G, Ochoa JE, Lombardi C, Bilo G. Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2013;10:143–155. doi: 10.1038/nrcardio.2013.1.
    1. Parati G, Torlasco C, Pengo M, Bilo G, Ochoa JE. Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases. Hypertens. Res. 2020;43:609–620. doi: 10.1038/s41440-020-0421-5.
    1. Levitan EB, Kaciroti N, Oparil S, Julius S, Muntner P. Blood pressure measurement device, number and timing of visits, and intra-individual visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2012;14:744–750. doi: 10.1111/jch.12005.
    1. Parati G, et al. Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 2021;39:1742–1767. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002922.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. STRIDE BP international initiative for accurate blood pressure measurement: systematic review of published validation studies of blood pressure measuring devices. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2019;21:1616–1622. doi: 10.1111/jch.13710.
    1. Cuspidi C, et al. Reproducibility of nocturnal blood pressure fall in early phases of untreated essential hypertension: a prospective observational study. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2004;18:503–509. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001681.
    1. Manning G, Rushton L, Donnelly R, Millar-Craig MW. Variability of diurnal changes in ambulatory blood pressure and nocturnal dipping status in untreated hypertensive and normotensive subjects. Am. J. Hypertens. 2000;13:1035–1038. doi: 10.1016/S0895-7061(00)00261-2.
    1. Burgos-Alonso N, Ruiz Arzalluz MV, Garcia-Alvarez A, Fernandez-Fernandez de Quincoces D, Grandes G. Reproducibility study of nocturnal blood pressure dipping in patients with high cardiovascular risk. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2021;23:1041–1050. doi: 10.1111/jch.14222.
    1. Stergiou GS, Mastorantonakis SE, Roussias LG. Intraindividual reproducibility of blood pressure surge upon rising after nighttime sleep and siesta. Hypertens. Res. 2008;31:1859–1864. doi: 10.1291/hypres.31.1859.
    1. Parati G, Omboni S, Rizzoni D, Agabiti-Rosei E, Mancia G. The smoothness index: a new, reproducible and clinically relevant measure of the homogeneity of the blood pressure reduction with treatment for hypertension. J. Hypertens. 1998;16:1685–1691. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199816110-00016.
    1. Omboni S, Parati G, Zanchetti A, Mancia G. Calculation of trough:peak ratio of antihypertensive treatment from ambulatory blood pressure: methodological aspects. J. Hypertens. 1995;13:1105–1112. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199510000-00005.
    1. di Rienzo M, Grassi G, Pedotti A, Mancia G. Continuous vs intermittent blood pressure measurements in estimating 24-h average blood pressure. Hypertension. 1983;5:264–269. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.5.2.264.
    1. Mena LJ, et al. How many measurements are needed to estimate blood pressure variability without loss of prognostic information? Am. J. Hypertens. 2014;27:46–55. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpt142.
    1. Kuwabara M, Harada K, Hishiki Y, Kario K. Validation of two watch-type wearable blood pressure monitors according to the ANSI/AAMI/ISO81060-2:2013 guidelines: Omron HEM-6410T-ZM and HEM-6410T-ZL. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2019;21:853–858. doi: 10.1111/jch.13499.
    1. Mukkamala R, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of cuffless blood pressure measurement devices: challenges and proposals. Hypertension. 2021;78:1161–1167. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.17747.
    1. Mukkamala R., Stergiou G. S. & Avolio A. P. Cuffless blood pressure measurement. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 24, 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-110220-014644 (2022).
    1. Pandit JA, Lores E, Batlle D. Cuffless blood pressure monitoring: promises and challenges. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2020;15:1531–1538. doi: 10.2215/CJN.03680320.
    1. Stergiou GS, Alpert BS, Mieke S, Wang J, O’Brien E. Validation protocols for blood pressure measuring devices in the 21st century. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2018;20:1096–1099. doi: 10.1111/jch.13294.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. A universal standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) collaboration statement. Hypertension. 2018;71:368–374. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.10237.
    1. International Organization for Standardization. Non-invasive sphygmomanometers - Part 3: Clinical investigation of continuous automated measurement type. ISO/DIS 81060-3.2. Under development. (2021)
    1. Bilo G, et al. A new method for assessing 24-h blood pressure variability after excluding the contribution of nocturnal blood pressure fall. J. Hypertens. 2007;25:2058–2066. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e32829c6a60.
    1. Zakopoulos NA, et al. Impact of the time rate of blood pressure variation on left ventricular mass. J. Hypertens. 2006;24:2071–2077. doi: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000244957.47114.88.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. Reproducibility of home, ambulatory, and clinic blood pressure: implications for the design of trials for the assessment of antihypertensive drug efficacy. Am. J. Hypertens. 2002;15:101–104. doi: 10.1016/S0895-7061(01)02324-X.
    1. Mancia G, et al. Limited reproducibility of MUCH and WUCH: evidence from the ELSA study. Eur. Heart J. 2020;41:1565–1571. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz651.
    1. Muntner P, et al. Blood pressure assessment in adults in clinical practice and clinic-based research: JACC scientific expert panel. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2019;73:317–335. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.069.
    1. Hansen TW, et al. Prognostic value of reading-to-reading blood pressure variability over 24 h in 8938 subjects from 11 populations. Hypertension. 2010;55:1049–1057. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.140798.
    1. Palatini P, et al. Added predictive value of night-time blood pressure variability for cardiovascular events and mortality: the Ambulatory Blood Pressure-International Study. Hypertension. 2014;64:487–493. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03694.
    1. Juhanoja EP, et al. Outcome-driven thresholds for increased home blood pressure variability. Hypertension. 2017;69:599–607. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.08603.
    1. Gosmanova EO, et al. Association of systolic blood pressure variability with mortality, coronary heart disease, stroke, and renal disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2016;68:1375–1386. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.054.
    1. Shimbo D, et al. Association between annual visit-to-visit blood pressure variability and stroke in postmenopausal women: data from the Women’s Health Initiative. Hypertension. 2012;60:625–630. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.193094.
    1. Muntner P, et al. Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure and coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and mortality: a cohort study. Ann. Intern. Med. 2015;163:329–338. doi: 10.7326/M14-2803.
    1. Ohkuma T, et al. Prognostic value of variability in systolic blood pressure related to vascular events and premature death in type 2 diabetes mellitus: the ADVANCE-ON study. Hypertension. 2017;70:461–468. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.09359.
    1. Wan EYF, et al. Association of visit-to-visit variability of systolic blood pressure with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease and mortality in patients with hypertension. J. Hypertens. 2020;38:943–953. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002347.
    1. Dasa O, et al. Association of 1-year blood pressure variability with long-term mortality among adults with coronary artery disease: a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw. Open. 2021;4:e218418. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8418.
    1. Mehlum MH, et al. Blood pressure variability and risk of cardiovascular events and death in patients with hypertension and different baseline risks. Eur. Heart J. 2018;39:2243–2251. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx760.
    1. Nuyujukian DS, Zhou JJ, Koska J, Reaven PD. Refining determinants of associations of visit-to-visit blood pressure variability with cardiovascular risk: results from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes trial. J. Hypertens. 2021;39:2173–2182. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002931.
    1. Chang TI, et al. Visit-to-visit office blood pressure variability and cardiovascular outcomes in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) Hypertension. 2017;70:751–758. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.09788.
    1. Cheng Y, et al. Visit-to-visit office blood pressure variability combined with Framingham risk score to predict all-cause mortality: a post hoc analysis of the systolic blood pressure intervention trial. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2021;23:1516–1525. doi: 10.1111/jch.14314.
    1. Stergiou GS, et al. Blood pressure variability assessed by home measurements: a systematic review. Hypertens. Res. 2014;37:565–572. doi: 10.1038/hr.2014.2.
    1. Diaz KM, et al. Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure and cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension. 2014;64:965–982. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03903.
    1. Messerli FH, Hofstetter L, Rimoldi SF, Rexhaj E, Bangalore S. Risk factor variability and cardiovascular outcome: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2019;73:2596–2603. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.02.063.
    1. Manning L, et al. Blood pressure variability and outcome after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: a post-hoc analysis of INTERACT2, a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:364–373. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70018-3.
    1. Li FK, et al. Day-by-day blood pressure variability in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2021;23:1675–1680. doi: 10.1111/jch.14338.
    1. Melgarejo JD, et al. Normal-tension glaucomatous optic neuropathy is related to blood pressure variability in the Maracaibo Aging Study. Hypertens. Res. 2021;44:1105–1112. doi: 10.1038/s41440-021-00687-1.
    1. de Heus RAA, et al. Association between blood pressure variability with dementia and cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension. 2021;78:1478–1489. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.17797.
    1. Ernst ME, et al. Long-term blood pressure variability and risk of cognitive decline and dementia among older adults. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e019613. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019613.
    1. Juhanoja EP, Niiranen TJ, Johansson JK, Puukka PJ, Jula AM. Agreement between ambulatory, home, and office blood pressure variability. J. Hypertens. 2016;34:61–67. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000772.
    1. Boubouchairopoulou N, Ntineri A, Kollias A, Destounis A, Stergiou GS. Blood pressure variability assessed by office, home, and ambulatory measurements: comparison, agreement, and determinants. Hypertens. Res. 2021;44:1617–1624. doi: 10.1038/s41440-021-00736-9.
    1. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood pressure lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension. 1. Overview, meta-analyses, and meta-regression analyses of randomized trials. J. Hypertens. 2014;32:2285–2295. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000378.
    1. Rothwell PM, et al. Effects of beta blockers and calcium-channel blockers on within-individual variability in blood pressure and risk of stroke. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9:469–480. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70066-1.
    1. Zhang Y, Agnoletti D, Safar ME, Blacher J. Effect of antihypertensive agents on blood pressure variability: the Natrilix SR versus candesartan and amlodipine in the reduction of systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients (X-CELLENT) study. Hypertension. 2011;58:155–160. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.174383.
    1. Webb AJ, Fischer U, Mehta Z, Rothwell PM. Effects of antihypertensive-drug class on interindividual variation in blood pressure and risk of stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2010;375:906–915. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60235-8.
    1. Wang JG, Yan P, Jeffers BW. Effects of amlodipine and other classes of antihypertensive drugs on long-term blood pressure variability: evidence from randomized controlled trials. JASH. 2014;8:340–349.
    1. Kollias A, Stergiou GS, Kyriakoulis KG, Bilo G, Parati G. Treating visit-to-visit blood pressure variability to improve prognosis: is amlodipine the drug of choice? Hypertension. 2017;70:862–866. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.10087.
    1. Mancia G, et al. Alerting reaction and rise in blood pressure during measurement by physician and nurse. Hypertension. 1987;9:209–215. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.9.2.209.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit