Cutoffs for white-coat and masked blood pressure effects: an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring study.
Journal
Journal of human hypertension
ISSN: 1476-5527
Titre abrégé: J Hum Hypertens
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8811625
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jul 2024
10 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
24
03
2024
accepted:
03
07
2024
revised:
02
07
2024
medline:
11
7
2024
pubmed:
11
7
2024
entrez:
10
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The values used to define white-coat and masked blood pressure (BP) effects are usually arbitrary. This study aimed at investigating the accuracy of various cutoffs based on the differences (ΔBP) between office BP (OBP) and 24h-ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to identify white-coat (WCH) and masked (MH) hypertension, which are phenotypes coupled with adverse prognosis. This cross-sectional study included 11,350 [Derivation cohort; 45% men, mean age = 55.1 ± 14.1 years, OBP = 132.1 ± 17.6/83.9 ± 12.5 mmHg, 24 h-ABPM = 121.6 ± 11.4/76.1 ± 9.6 mmHg, 25% using antihypertensive medications (AH)] and 7220 (Validation cohort; 46% men, mean age = 58.6 ± 15.1 years, OBP = 136.8 ± 18.7/87.6 ± 13.0 mmHg, 24 h-ABPM = 125.5 ± 12.6/77.7 ± 10.3 mmHg; 32% using AH) unique individuals who underwent 24 h-ABPM. We compared the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and area under the curve (AUC) of diverse ΔBP cutoffs to detect WCH (ΔsystolicBP/ΔdiastolicBP = 28/17, 20/15, 20/10, 16/11, 15/9, 14/9 mmHg and ΔsystolicBP = 13 and 10 mmHg) and MH (ΔsystolicBP/ΔdiastolicBP = -14/-9, -5/-2, -3/-1, -1/-1, 0/0, 2/2 mmHg and ΔsystolicBP = -5 and -3mmHg). The 20/15 mmHg cutoff showed the best AUC (0.804, 95%CI = 0.794-0.814) to detect WCH, while the 2/2 mmHg cutoff showed the highest AUC (0.741, 95%CI = 0.728-0.754) to detect MH in the Derivation cohort. Both cutoffs also had the best accuracy to detect WCH (0.767, 95%CI = 0.754-0.780) and MH (0.767, 95%CI = 0.750-0.784) in the Validation cohort. In secondary analyses, these cutoffs had the best accuracy to detect individuals with higher and lower office-than-ABPM grades in both cohorts. In conclusion, the 20/15 and 2/2 mmHg ΔBP cutoffs had the best accuracy to detect hypertensive patients with WCH and MH, respectively, and can serve as indicators of marked white-coat and masked BP effects derived from 24 h-ABPM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38987381
doi: 10.1038/s41371-024-00930-5
pii: 10.1038/s41371-024-00930-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation | Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development)
ID : 310869/2021-8
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Nadruz W Jr, Claggett B, Henglin M, Shah AM, Skali H, Rosamond WD, et al. Racial disparities in risks of stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2089–90.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1616085
pubmed: 28538119
pmcid: 5613984
Nadruz W Jr, Claggett B, Henglin M, Shah AM, Skali H, Rosamond WD, et al. Widening racial differences in risks for coronary heart disease. Circulation. 2018;137:1195–7.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.030564
pubmed: 29530895
pmcid: 5854206
Yusuf S, Joseph P, Rangarajan S, Islam S, Mente A, Hystad P, et al. Modifiable risk factors, cardiovascular disease, and mortality in 155 722 individuals from 21 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries (PURE): a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020;395:795–808.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32008-2
pubmed: 31492503
Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey DE Jr, Collins KJ, Dennison Himmelfarb C, 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: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:2199–269.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.005
pubmed: 29146533
Mancia G, Kreutz R, Brunström M, Burnier M, Grassi G, Januszewicz A, et al. 2023 ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension: endorsed by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) and the European Renal Association (ERA). J Hypertens. 2023;41:1874–2071.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003480
pubmed: 37345492
Barroso WKS, Rodrigues CIS, Bortolotto LA, Mota-Gomes MA, Brandão AA, Feitosa ADM, et al. Brazilian guidelines of hypertension—2020. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021;116:516–658.
doi: 10.36660/abc.20201238
pubmed: 33909761
pmcid: 9949730
Huang Y, Huang W, Mai W, Cai X, An D, Liu Z, et al. White-coat hypertension is a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases and total mortality. J Hypertens. 2017;35:677–88.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001226
pubmed: 28253216
pmcid: 5338886
Palla M, Saber H, Konda S, Briasoulis A. Masked hypertension and cardiovascular outcomes: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Integr Blood Press Control. 2018;11:11–24.
doi: 10.2147/IBPC.S128947
pubmed: 29379316
pmcid: 5759852
Mancia G, Facchetti R, Vanoli J, Dell’Oro R, Seravalle G, Grassi G. White-coat hypertension without organ damage: impact on long-term mortality, new hypertension, and new organ damage. Hypertension. 2022;79:1057–66.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.18792
pubmed: 35191312
Muxfeldt ES, Fiszman R, de Souza F, Viegas B, Oliveira FC, Salles GF. Appropriate time interval to repeat ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in patients with white-coat resistant hypertension. Hypertension. 2012;59:384–9.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.185405
pubmed: 22215711
Viera AJ, Lin FC, Tuttle LA, Olsson E, Stankevitz K, Girdler SS, et al. Reproducibility of masked hypertension among adults 30 years or older. Blood Press Monit. 2014;19:208–15.
doi: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000054
pubmed: 24842491
pmcid: 4625914
Mancia G, Facchetti R, Grassi G, Bombelli M. Adverse prognostic value of persistent office blood pressure elevation in white coat hypertension. Hypertension. 2015;66:437–44.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.115.05367
pubmed: 26056342
Myers MG, Haynes RB, Rabkin SW. Canadian Hypertension Society guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Am J Hypertens. 1999;12:1149–57.
doi: 10.1016/S0895-7061(99)00199-5
pubmed: 10604495
NICE: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Hypertension in adults: diagnosis and management. Clinical guideline [NG136]. 2019. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng136 .
Myers MG, Reeves RA. White coat phenomenon in patients receiving antihypertensive therapy. Am J Hypertens. 1991;4:844–9.
doi: 10.1093/ajh/4.10.844
pubmed: 1747219
MacDonald MB, Laing GP, Wilson MP, Wilson TW. Prevalence and predictors of white-coat response in patients with treated hypertension. CMAJ. 1999;161:265–9.
pubmed: 10463047
pmcid: 1230502
Sheppard JP, Holder R, Nichols L, Bray E, Hobbs FD, Mant J, et al. Predicting out-of-office blood pressure level using repeated measurements in the clinic: an observational cohort study. J Hypertens. 2014;32:2171–8.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000319
pubmed: 25144295
pmcid: 4222615
Adiyaman A, Aksoy I, Deinum J, Staessen JA, Thien T. Influence of the hospital environment and presence of the physician on the white-coat effect. J Hypertens. 2015;33:2245–9.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000691
pubmed: 26259118
Schwartz CL, Clark C, Koshiaris C, Gill PS, Greenfield SM, Haque SM, et al. Interarm difference in systolic blood pressure in different ethnic groups and relationship to the “White Coat Effect”: a cross-sectional study. Am J Hypertens. 2017;30:884–91.
doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpx073
pubmed: 28475667
pmcid: 5861584
Feitosa ADM, Mota-Gomes MA, Barroso WS, Miranda RD, Barbosa ECD, Pedrosa RP, et al. Blood pressure cutoffs for white-coat and masked effects in a large population undergoing home blood pressure monitoring. Hypertens Res. 2019;42:1816–23.
doi: 10.1038/s41440-019-0298-3
pubmed: 31263210
Sheppard JP, Stevens R, Gill P, Martin U, Godwin M, Hanley J, et al. Predicting out-of-office blood pressure in the clinic (PROOF-BP): derivation and validation of a tool to improve the accuracy of blood pressure measurement in clinical practice. Hypertension. 2016;67:941–50.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.115.07108
pubmed: 27001299
Kabutoya T, Ishikawa J, Hoshide S, Eguchi K, Ishikawa S, Shimada K, et al. Determinants of negative white-coat effect in treated hypertensive patients: the Jichi Morning Hypertension Research (J-MORE) study. Am J Hypertens. 2009;22:35–40.
doi: 10.1038/ajh.2008.304
pubmed: 18927542
Franklin SS, Thijs L, Hansen TW, O’Brien E, Staessen JA. White-coat hypertension: new insights from recent studies. Hypertension. 2013;62:982–7.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.113.01275
pubmed: 24041952
Kario K, Tomitani N, Hoshide S, Nishizawa M, Yoshida T, Kabutoya T, et al. Different home blood pressure thresholds to predict perfect 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure control in treated hypertension based on an “All-in-One” device. Hypertension. 2023;80:2464–72.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.21578
pubmed: 37671575
Mancia G, Facchetti R, Seravalle G, Cuspidi C, Corrao G, Grassi G. Adding home and/or ambulatory blood pressure to office blood pressure for cardiovascular risk prediction. Hypertension. 2021;77:640–9.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.16303
pubmed: 33390055
Stergiou GS, Salgami EV, Tzamouranis DG, Roussias LG. Masked hypertension assessed by ambulatory versus home blood pressure monitoring: is it the same phenomenon? Am J Hypertens. 2005;18:772–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.01.003
pubmed: 15925734