From the Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid/Instituto de Investigación Hospital Universitario La Paz (IdiPAZ) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (CIBER) of Epidemiology and Public Health (J.R.B., L.M.R., J.J.C., F.R.-A.), the Hypertension Unit, Department of Nephrology, and Cardiorenal Translational Research Laboratory, Institute of Research, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre and CIBER of Cardiovascular Disease (L.M.R., G.R.-H., J.S.), the School of Doctoral Studies and Research, Universidad Europea de Madrid (L.M.R.), and Madrid Institute for Advanced Studies Food Institute, Campus de Excelencia Internacional de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid y Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (F.R.-A.), Madrid, the Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital Mutua Terrassa (A.S.), and La Mina Primary Care Center (E.V.), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, and the Nephrology Service, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Red de Investigación Renal, Oviedo (M.G.) - all in Spain; and University College London (UCL) Institute of Cardiovascular Science and the National Institute for Health Research UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, London (B.W.).
N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 19;378(16):1509-1520. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1712231.
Evidence for the influence of ambulatory blood pressure on prognosis derives mainly from population-based studies and a few relatively small clinical investigations. This study examined the associations of blood pressure measured in the clinic (clinic blood pressure) and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a large cohort of patients in primary care.
We analyzed data from a registry-based, multicenter, national cohort that included 63,910 adults recruited from 2004 through 2014 in Spain. Clinic and 24-hour ambulatory blood-pressure data were examined in the following categories: sustained hypertension (elevated clinic and elevated 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure), "white-coat" hypertension (elevated clinic and normal 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure), masked hypertension (normal clinic and elevated 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure), and normotension (normal clinic and normal 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure). Analyses were conducted with Cox regression models, adjusted for clinic and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures and for confounders.
During a median follow-up of 4.7 years, 3808 patients died from any cause, and 1295 of these patients died from cardiovascular causes. In a model that included both 24-hour and clinic measurements, 24-hour systolic pressure was more strongly associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.58 per 1-SD increase in pressure; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56 to 1.60, after adjustment for clinic blood pressure) than the clinic systolic pressure (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.04, after adjustment for 24-hour blood pressure). Corresponding hazard ratios per 1-SD increase in pressure were 1.55 (95% CI, 1.53 to 1.57, after adjustment for clinic and daytime blood pressures) for nighttime ambulatory systolic pressure and 1.54 (95% CI, 1.52 to 1.56, after adjustment for clinic and nighttime blood pressures) for daytime ambulatory systolic pressure. These relationships were consistent across subgroups of age, sex, and status with respect to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and antihypertensive treatment. Masked hypertension was more strongly associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 2.83; 95% CI, 2.12 to 3.79) than sustained hypertension (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.31) or white-coat hypertension (hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.38 to 2.32). Results for cardiovascular mortality were similar to those for all-cause mortality.
Ambulatory blood-pressure measurements were a stronger predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality than clinic blood-pressure measurements. White-coat hypertension was not benign, and masked hypertension was associated with a greater risk of death than sustained hypertension. (Funded by the Spanish Society of Hypertension and others.).
有关动态血压对预后影响的证据主要来自基于人群的研究和一些相对较小的临床研究。本研究在初级保健中一项大型患者队列中,考察了诊所测量血压(诊所血压)和 24 小时动态血压与全因和心血管死亡率的关系。
我们分析了一项基于登记、多中心、全国性队列的研究数据,该队列包括 2004 年至 2014 年期间在西班牙招募的 63910 名成年人。对以下类别的诊所和 24 小时动态血压数据进行了检查:持续性高血压(升高的诊所和升高的 24 小时动态血压)、“白大衣”高血压(升高的诊所和正常的 24 小时动态血压)、隐匿性高血压(正常的诊所和升高的 24 小时动态血压)和正常血压(正常的诊所和正常的 24 小时动态血压)。采用 Cox 回归模型进行分析,模型调整了诊所和 24 小时动态血压以及混杂因素。
在中位随访 4.7 年期间,有 3808 名患者死于任何原因,其中 1295 名死于心血管原因。在一个同时包含 24 小时和诊所测量值的模型中,24 小时收缩压与全因死亡率的相关性更强(风险比,每升高 1-SD 增加 1.58;95%置信区间 [CI],1.56 至 1.60,在调整诊所血压后),而诊所收缩压与全因死亡率的相关性较弱(风险比,1.02;95%CI,1.00 至 1.04,在调整 24 小时血压后)。每升高 1-SD 的相应风险比为 1.55(95%CI,1.53 至 1.57,在调整诊所和日间血压后)夜间动态收缩压和 1.54(95%CI,1.52 至 1.56,在调整诊所和夜间血压后)日间动态收缩压。这些关系在年龄、性别和肥胖、糖尿病、心血管疾病和降压治疗方面的亚组中是一致的。隐匿性高血压与全因死亡率的相关性更强(风险比,2.83;95%CI,2.12 至 3.79),而持续性高血压(风险比,1.80;95%CI,1.41 至 2.31)或“白大衣”高血压(风险比,1.79;95%CI,1.38 至 2.32)。心血管死亡率的结果与全因死亡率的结果相似。
与诊所血压测量相比,动态血压测量对全因和心血管死亡率的预测作用更强。“白大衣”高血压并非良性,隐匿性高血压与死亡风险增加的相关性大于持续性高血压。(由西班牙高血压学会等资助)。