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.
Journal
Journal of hypertension
ISSN: 1473-5598
Titre abrégé: J Hypertens
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8306882
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2021
01 11 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
8
7
2021
medline:
28
10
2021
entrez:
7
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As there is uncertainty about the extent to which baseline blood pressure level or cardiovascular risk modifies the relationship between blood pressure variability (BPv) and cardiovascular disease, we comprehensively examined the role of BPv in cardiovascular disease risk in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Trial. Using data from ACCORD, we examined the relationship of BPv with development of the primary CVD outcome, major coronary heart disease (CHD), and total stroke using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. BPv was associated with the primary CVD outcome and major CHD but not stroke. The positive association with the primary CVD outcome and major CHD was more pronounced in low and high strata of baseline SBP (<120 and >140 mmHg) and DBP (<70 and >80 mmHg). The effect of BPv on CVD and CHD was more pronounced in those with both prior CVD history and low blood pressure. Dips, not elevations, in blood pressure appeared to drive these associations. The relationships were generally not attenuated by adjustment for mean blood pressure, medication adherence, or baseline comorbidities. A sensitivity analysis using CVD events from the long-term posttrial follow-up (ACCORDION) was consistent with the results from ACCORD. In ACCORD, the effect of BPv on adverse cardiovascular (but not cerebrovascular) outcomes is modified by baseline blood pressure and prior CVD. Recognizing these more nuanced relationships may help improve risk stratification and blood pressure management decisions as well as provide insight into potential underlying mechanisms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34232160
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002931
pii: 00004872-202111000-00008
pmc: PMC8500916
mid: NIHMS1712136
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2173-2182Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : F32 HL156626
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : P30 ES006694
Pays : United States
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : R01 HL094775
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Stevens SL, Wood S, Koshiaris C, Law K, Glasziou P, Stevens RJ, McManus RJ. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2016; 354:i4098.
Muntner P, Whittle J, Lynch AI, Colantonio LD, Simpson LM, Einhorn PT, 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.
Gosmanova EO, Mikkelsen MK, Molnar MZ, Lu JL, Yessayan LT, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Kovesdy CP. Association of systolic blood pressure variability with mortality, coronary heart disease, stroke, and renal disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016; 68:1375–1386.
Rothwell PM, Howard SC, Dolan E, O’Brien E, Dobson JE, Dahlöf B, et al. Prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure, and episodic hypertension. Lancet 2010; 375:895–905.
Chiriacò M, Pateras K, Virdis A, Charakida MS, Kyriakopoulou D, Nannipieri M, et al. Association between blood pressure variability, cardiovascular disease and mortality in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes, Obes Metab 2019; 21:2587–2598.
Nuyujukian DS, Koska J, Bahn G, Reaven PD, Zhou JJ. Blood pressure variability and risk of heart failure in ACCORD and the VADT. Diabetes Care 2020; 43:1471–1478.
Shimbo D, Shea S, McClelland RL, Viera AJ, Mann D, Newman J, et al. Associations of aortic distensibility and arterial elasticity with long-term visit-to-visit blood pressure variability: the multiethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). Am J Hypertens 2013; 26:896–902.
Zhou TL, Henry RMA, Stehouwer CDA, Van Sloten TT, Reesink KD, Kroon AA. Blood pressure variability, arterial stiffness, and arterial remodeling the Maastricht study. Hypertension 2018; 72:1002–1010.
Diaz KM, Veerabhadrappa P, Kashem MA, Feairheller DL, Sturgeon KM, Williamson ST, et al. Relationship of visit-to-visit and ambulatory blood pressure variability to vascular function in African Americans. Hypertens Res 2012; 35:55–61.
Nwabuo CC, Yano Y, Moreira HT, Appiah D, Vasconcellos HD, Aghaji QN, et al. Association between visit-to-visit blood pressure variability in early adulthood and myocardial structure and function in later life. JAMA Cardiol 2020; 5:795–801.
Mehlum MH, Liestøl K, Kjeldsen SE, Julius S, Hua TA, Rothwell PM, 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.
Poortvliet RKE, Ford I, Lloyd SM, Sattar N, Mooijaart SP, de Craen AJ, et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular risk in the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER). PLoS One 2012; 7:e52438.
Vidal-Petiot E, Stebbins A, Chiswell K, Ardissino D, Aylward PE, Cannon CP, et al. STABILITY Investigators. Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary heart disease. Insights from the STABILITY trial. Eur Heart J 2017; 38:2813–2822.
McEvoy JW, Chen Y, Rawlings A, Hoogeveen RC, Ballantyne CM, Blumenthal RS, et al. Diastolic blood pressure, subclinical myocardial damage, and cardiac events: implications for blood pressure control. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016; 68:1713–1722.
Espeland M, Probstfield J, Hire D, Redmon JB, Evans GW, Coday M, et al. Look AHEAD Research Group, ACCORD Study Group. Systolic blood pressure control among individuals with type 2 diabetes: a comparative effectiveness analysis of three interventions. Am J Hypertens 2015; 28:995–1009.
Aronow WS. Orthostatic Hypotension in Diabetics in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) Blood Pressure Trial. Hypertension 2016; 68:851–852.
Buse JB, Friedewald WT, Bigger JT, Cooper LS, Cushman WC, et al. ACCORD Study Group. Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD). trial: design and methods. Am J Cardiol 2007; 99:21i–33i.
Cushman WC, Grimm RH Jr, Cutler JA, Evans GW, Capes S, Corson MA, et al. Rationale and design for the blood pressure intervention of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD). Trial Am J Cardiol 2007; 9:44i–55i.
Zhou JJ, Schwenke DC, Bahn G, Reaven P. VADT Investigators. Glycemic variation and cardiovascular risk in the Veterans Affairs Diabetes trial. Diabetes Care 2018; 41:2187–2194.
Zhou JJ, Koska J, Bahn G, Reaven P. Glycaemic variation is a predictor of all-cause mortality in the Veteran Affairs Diabetes Trial. Diabetes Vasc Dis Res 2019; 16:178–185.
Zhou JJ, Coleman R, Holman RR, Reaven P. Long-term glucose variability and risk of nephropathy complication in UKPDS, ACCORD and VADT trials. Diabetologia 2020; 63:2482–2485.
ACCORD Study Group. Nine-year effects of 3.7 years of intensive glycemic control on cardiovascular outcomes. Diabetes Care 2016; 39:701–708.
Ferreira JP, Duarte K, Pitt B, Dickstein K, McMurray JJV, Zannad F, Rossignol P. Visit-to-visit blood pressure variation is associated with outcomes in a U-shaped fashion in patients with myocardial infarction complicated with systolic dysfunction and/or heart failure: findings from the EPHESUS and OPTIMAAL trials. J Hypertens 2018; 36:1736–1742.
Rosei EA, Chiarini G, Rizzoni D. How important is blood pressure variability? Eur Hear J Suppl 2020; 22: (Suppl e): E1–E6.
Wu C, Shlipak MG, Stawski RS, Peralta CA, Psaty BM, Harris TB, et al. Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability and mortality and cardiovascular outcomes among older adults: the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study. Am J Hypertens 2017; 30:151–158.
Lee HT, Lim YH, Kim BK, Lee KW, Lee JU, Kim KS, et al. The relationship between ambulatory arterial stiffness index and blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients. Korean Circ J 2011; 41:235–240.
Spallone V. Blood pressure variability and autonomic dysfunction. Curr Diab Rep 2018; 18:137.
Nagai M, Hoshide S, Ishikawa J, Shimada K, Kario K. Visit-to-visit blood pressure variations: new independent determinants for carotid artery measures in the elderly at high risk of cardiovascular disease. J Am Soc Hypertens 2011; 5:184–192.
Okada R, Okada A, Okada T, Nanasato M, Wakai K. Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability is a marker of cardiac diastolic function and carotid atherosclerosis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2014; 14:188.
Mezue K, Goyal A, Pressman GS, Matthew R, Horrow JC, Rangaswami J. Blood pressure variability predicts adverse events and cardiovascular outcomes in SPRINT. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2018; 20:1247–1252.
Bache RJ, Schwartz JS. Effect of perfusion pressure distal to a coronary stenosis on transmural myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1982; 65:928–935.
Hata J, Arima H, Rothwell PM, Woodward M, Zoungas S, Anderson C, et al. ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Effects of visit-to-visit variability in systolic blood pressure on macrovascular and microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the ADVANCE trial. Circulation 2013; 128:1325–1334.
Silverman A, Petersen NH. Physiology, Cerebral Autoregulation. StatPearls [Internet] . Treasure Island, Florida: StatPearls Publishing; 2021.
Harms MPM, Finucane C, Pérez-Denia L, Jurachek S, van Wijnen VK, Lipsitz LA, et al. Systemic and cerebral circulatory adjustment within the first 60 s after active standing: an integrative physiological view. Auton Neurosci Basic Clin 2021; 231:102756.
Castro P, Azevedo E, Sorond F. Cerebral autoregulation in stroke. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2018; 20:37.
De Courson H, Leffondré K, Tzourio C. Blood pressure variability and risk of cardiovascular event: Is it appropriate to use the future for predicting the present? Eur Heart J 2018; 39:4220.
Torp-Pedersen C, Mortensen RN, Jeppesen J, Gerds TA. Blood pressure and the uncertainty of prediction using hazard ratio. Eur Heart J 2018; 39:4219.
Wen SW, Kramer MS, Hoey J, Hanley JA, Usher RH. Terminal digit preference, random error, and bias in routine clinical measurement of blood pressure. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46:1187–1193.
Greiver M, Kalia S, Voruganti T, Aliarzadeh B, Moineddin R, Hinton W, et al. Trends in end digit preference for blood pressure and associations with cardiovascular outcomes in Canadian and UK primary care: a retrospective observational study. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e024970.
Hansen TW, Li Y, Staessen JA. Blood pressure variability remains an elusive predictor of cardiovascular outcome. Am J Hypertens 2009; 22:3–4.
De Boer IH, Bangalore S, Benetos A, Davis AM, Michos ED, Muntner P, et al. Diabetes and hypertension: a position statement by the American diabetes association. Diabetes Care 2017; 40:1273–1284.
Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Agabiti Rosei E, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. Authors/Task Force Members. 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.