Blood pressure variability, cardiovascular risk and antihypertensive treatment

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (supplement4) ◽  
pp. S27-A34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianfranco Parati ◽  
Luisa Ulian ◽  
Cinzia Santucciu ◽  
Stefano Omboni ◽  
Giuseppe Mancia
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annamária Magdás ◽  
László Szilágyi ◽  
Alexandru Incze

Objective. The aim of this study is to define the normal range for average real variability (ARV) and to establish whether it can be considered as an additional cardiovascular risk factor.Methods. In this observational study, 110 treated hypertensive patients were included and admitted for antihypertensive treatment adjustment. Circadian blood pressure was recorded with validated devices. Blood pressure variability (BPV) was assessed according to the ARV definition. Based on their variability, patients were classified into low, medium, and high variability groups using the fuzzyc-means algorithm. To assess cardiovascular risk, blood samples were collected. Characteristics of the groups were compared by ANOVA tests.Results. Low variability was defined as ARV below 9.8 mmHg (32 patients), medium as 9.8–12.8 mmHg (48 patients), and high variability above 12.8 mmHg (30 patients). Mean systolic blood pressure was 131.2 ± 16.7, 135.0 ± 12.1, and 141.5 ± 11.4 mmHg in the low, medium, and high variability groups, respectively (p=0.0113). Glomerular filtration rate was 78.6 ± 29.3, 74.8 ± 26.4, and62.7±23.2 mL/min/1.73 m2in the low, medium, and high variability groups, respectively (p=0.0261).Conclusion. Increased values of average real variability represent an additional cardiovascular risk factor. Therefore, reducing BP variability might be as important as achieving optimal BP levels, but there is need for further studies to define a widely acceptable threshold value.


2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 295-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Athanasios Bikos ◽  
Elena Angeloudi ◽  
Evangelos Memmos ◽  
Charalampos Loutradis ◽  
Antonios Karpetas ◽  
...  

Background: Short-term blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk in hemodialysis. Patients with intradialytic hypertension have high risk of adverse outcomes. Whether BPV is increased in these patients is not clear. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term BPV in patients with and without intradialytic hypertension. Methods: Forty-one patients with and 82 patients without intradialytic hypertension (intradialytic SBP rise ≥10 mm Hg to > 150 mm Hg) matched in a 1: 2 ratio for age, sex, and hemodialysis vintage were included. All subjects underwent 48-h ambulatory BP monitoring during a regular hemodialysis and the subsequent interdialytic interval. Brachial and aortic BPV were calculated with validated formulas and compared between the 2 groups during the 48-h and the 44-h periods and during the 2 daytime and nighttime periods respectively. Results: During 48-h or 44-h periods and daytime or nighttime, brachial SBP/DBP and aortic SBP/DBP were significantly higher in cases than in controls. All brachial SBP/DBP BPV indexes [SD, weighted SD (wSD), coefficient-of-variation (CV) and average-real-variability (ARV)] were not significantly different between groups during the 48- or 44-h periods (48-h: SBP-ARV 11.59 ± 3.05 vs. 11.70 ± 2.68, p = 0.844, DBP-ARV: 8.60 ± 1.90 vs. 8.90 ± 1.63, p = 0.357). Analysis stratified by day or night between days 1 and 2 revealed, in general, similar results. No significant differences in dipping pattern were observed between groups. Analysis of aortic BPV had similar findings. Conclusions: BPV is similar between those with and without intradialytic hypertension. However, those with intradialytic hypertension have a sustained increase in systolic and diastolic BP during the entire interdialytic interval.


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 282-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murat Celik ◽  
Uygar Cagdas Yuksel ◽  
Erkan Yildirim ◽  
Erol Gursoy ◽  
Mustafa Koklu ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document