Systolic blood pressure.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Basile JN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC1124431 | biostudies-literature | 2002 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Similar Datasets
Project description:Recent publications have stated that the blood pressure (BP) measurement technique used in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) was unattended. However, the SPRINT protocol does not address the issue of attendance. A survey was conducted immediately after SPRINT closeout visits were completed to inquire whether BP measurements were usually attended or unattended by staff. There were 4082 participants at 38 sites that measured BP after leaving the participant alone the entire time (always alone), 2247 at 25 sites that had personnel in the room the entire time (never alone), 1746 at 19 sites that left the participant alone only during the rest period (alone for rest), and 570 at 6 sites that left the participant alone only during the BP readings (alone for BP measurement). Similar systolic and diastolic BPs within randomized groups were noted during follow-up at the majority of visits in all 4 measurement categories. In the always alone and never alone categories, the intensive group had a similarly reduced risk for the primary outcome compared with the standard group (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.76 and hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.91, respectively; pairwise interaction P value, 0.88); risk was not significantly reduced for the intensive group in the smaller alone-for-rest and the alone-for-BP-measurement categories. Similar BP levels and cardiovascular disease risk reduction were observed in the intensive group in SPRINT participants whether the measurement technique used was primarily attended or unattended.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC5967644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Automated cuff measured blood pressure (BP) is the global standard used for diagnosing hypertension, but there are concerns regarding the accuracy of the method. Individual variability in systolic BP (SBP) amplification from central (aorta) to peripheral (brachial) arteries could be related to the accuracy of cuff BP, but this has never been determined and was the aim of this study. Automated cuff BP and invasive brachial BP were recorded in 795 participants (74% male, aged 64 ± 11 years) receiving coronary angiography at five independent research sites (using seven different automated cuff BP devices). SBP amplification was recorded invasively by catheter and defined as brachial SBP minus aortic SBP. Compared with invasive brachial SBP, cuff SBP was significantly underestimated (130 ± 18 mmHg vs. 138 ± 22 mmHg, p < 0.001). The level of SBP amplification varied significantly among individuals (mean ± SD, 7.3 ± 9.1 mmHg) and was similar to level of difference between cuff and invasive brachial SBP (mean difference -7.6 ± 11.9 mmHg). SBP amplification explained most of the variance in accuracy of cuff SBP (R2 = 19%). The accuracy of cuff SBP was greatest among participants with the lowest SBP amplification (ptrend < 0.001). After cuff BP values were corrected for SBP amplification, there was a significant improvement in the mean difference from the intra-arterial standard (p < 0.0001) and in the accuracy of hypertension classification according to 2017 ACC/AHA guideline thresholds (p = 0.005). The level of SBP amplification is a critical factor associated with the accuracy of conventional automated cuff measured BP.
| S-EPMC10404511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SubjectThis study aimed to establish a normal range for ankle systolic blood pressure (SBP).MethodsA total of 948 subjects who had normal brachial SBP (90-139 mmHg) at investigation were enrolled. Supine BP of four limbs was simultaneously measured using four automatic BP measurement devices. The ankle-arm difference (An-a) on SBP of both sides was calculated. Two methods were used for establishing normal range of ankle SBP: the 99% method was decided on the 99% reference range of actual ankle BP, and the An-a method was the sum of An-a and the low or up limits of normal arm SBP (90-139 mmHg).ResultsWhether in the right or left side, the ankle SBP was significantly higher than the arm SBP (right: 137.1 ± 16.9 vs 119.7 ± 11.4 mmHg, P<0.05). Based on the 99% method, the normal range of ankle SBP was 94~181 mmHg for the total population, 84~166 mmHg for the young (18-44 y), 107~176 mmHg for the middle-aged(45-59 y) and 113~179 mmHg for the elderly (≥ 60 y) group. As the An-a on SBP was 13 mmHg in the young group and 20 mmHg in both middle-aged and elderly groups, the normal range of ankle SBP on the An-a method was 103-153 mmHg for young and 110-160 mmHg for middle-elderly subjects.ConclusionA primary reference for normal ankle SBP was suggested as 100-165 mmHg in the young and 110-170 mmHg in the middle-elderly subjects.
| S-EPMC4459970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCentral aortic blood pressure (BP) could be a better risk predictor than brachial BP. This study examined whether invasively measured aortic systolic BP improved outcome prediction beyond risk prediction by conventional cuff-based office systolic BP in patients with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD).MethodsIn a prospective, longitudinal cohort study, aortic and office systolic BPs were registered in patients undergoing elective coronary angiography (CAG). CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Multivariable Cox models were used to determine the association with incident myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and death.ResultsAortic and office systolic BPs were available in 39,866 patients (mean age: 64 years; 58% males; 64% with hypertension) out of which 6605 (17%) had CKD. During a median follow-up of 7.2 years (interquartile range: 4.6-10.1 years), 1367 strokes (CKD: 353), 1858 MIs (CKD: 446), and 7551 deaths (CKD: 2515) occurred. CKD increased the risk of stroke, MI, and death significantly. Office and aortic systolic BP were both associated with stroke in non-CKD patients (adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence interval per 10 mm Hg: 1.08 [1.05-1.12] and 1.06 [1.03-1.09], respectively) and with MI in patients with CKD (adjusted hazard ratios: 1.08 [1.03-1.13] and 1.08 [1.04-1.12], respectively). There was no significant difference between prediction of outcome with office or aortic systolic BP when adjusted models were compared with C-statistics.ConclusionRegardless of CKD status, invasively measured central aortic systolic BP does not improve the ability to predict outcome compared with brachial office BP measurement.
| S-EPMC10851008 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-BioLINCC)
| PRJNA1047941 | ENA
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-BioLINCC)
| PRJNA1047942 | ENA
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-Imaging)
| PRJNA1079434 | ENA
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-Imaging)
| PRJNA1079433 | ENA
Project description:BackgroundThe clinical significance of isolated diastolic hypertension defined by the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure (BP) guidelines remains inconsistent. We examined whether long-term diastolic burden predicts the first major adverse cardiovascular event in participants with sustained and untreated normal systolic BP.MethodsThe Mass General Brigham Biobank is a New England health care-based cohort recruited between 2010 and 2021. A total of 15 979 participants aged 18 to 64 years and without prior cardiovascular disease, antihypertensives, or high systolic BP were studied. The cumulative diastolic burden was determined as the area under the curve for diastolic BP (DBP) ≥80 mm Hg over 5 years before enrollment. Major adverse cardiovascular event was defined as a composite of first incident ischemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, or all-cause death.ResultsOf the 15 979 participants, mean (SD) age at enrollment was 47.6 (14.3) years, 11 950 (74.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) systolic BP and DBP were 118.0 (12.9) and 72.2 (9.3) mm Hg, respectively. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3.5 (1.8-5.4) years, 2467 (15.4%) major adverse cardiovascular events occurred. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, each SD increase in cumulative DBP was independently associated with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.06 (1.02-1.10) without effect modification by sex (P=0.65), age (P=0.46), or race/ethnicity (P=0.24). In addition to traditional risk factors, cumulative DBP modestly improved the discrimination C index (95% CI) from 0.74 (0.72-0.75) to 0.75 (0.74-0.76; likelihood ratio test, P=0.037).ConclusionsAmong individuals with normal systolic BP, cumulative DBP may augment cardiovascular disease risk stratification beyond a single DBP measure and traditional risk factors.
| S-EPMC10841692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Age-dependent genetic effects on susceptibility to hypertension have been documented. We present a novel variance-component method for the estimation of age-dependent genetic effects on longitudinal systolic blood pressure using 57,827 Affymetrix single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on chromosomes 17-22 genotyped in 2,475 members of the Offspring Cohort of the Framingham Heart Study. We used the likelihood-ratio test statistic to test the main genetic effect, genotype-by-age interaction, and simultaneously, main genetic effect and genotype-by-age interactions (2 degrees of freedom (df) test) for each SNP. Applying Bonferroni correction, three SNPs were significantly associated with longitudinal blood pressure in the analysis of main genetic effects or in combined 2-df analyses. For the associations detected using the simultaneous 2-df test, neither main effects nor genotype-by-age interaction p-values reached genome-wide statistical significance. The value of the 2-df test for screening genetic interaction effects could not be established in this study.
| S-EPMC2795990 | biostudies-literature