UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2017 UpToDate, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.

Medline ® Abstracts for References 33-36

of 'Ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring and white coat hypertension in adults'

33
TI
Masked hypertension.
AU
Pickering TG, Davidson K, Gerin W, Schwartz JE
SO
Hypertension. 2002;40(6):795.
 
AD
PMID
34
TI
Predictive factors for masked hypertension within a population of controlled hypertensives.
AU
Mallion JM, Clerson P, Bobrie G, Genes N, Vaisse B, Chatellier G
SO
J Hypertens. 2006;24(12):2365.
 
CONTEXT: Prevalence of masked hypertension (MH) is far from negligible reaching 40% in some studies. The SHEAF study (Self measurement of blood pressure at Home in the Elderly: Assessment and Follow-Up) and others clearly showed that masked hypertension (MH) as detected by home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) is associated with poor cardiovascular prognosis.
OBJECTIVE: Systematic HBPM to detect MH is not yet routine. The aim of this work is to better define the clinical profile of masked hypertensives within a population with controlled office blood pressure (BP) and the factors associated with a higher prevalence of MH.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: BP was measured at the clinic by the doctor and at home by the patient himself. Risk factors for MH were analysed in a cohort of 1150 treated hypertensive patients over the age of 60 (mean age 70 +/- 6.5, 48.9% men) with controlled office BP. (SBP<140 mmHg and DBP<90 mmHg).
RESULTS: 463 patients (40%) were masked hypertensives (SBP>or = 135 mmHg or DBP>or = 85 mmHg at home). Three parameters were associated with MH (odds ratio OR): office SBP (OR = 1.110), male gender (OR = 2.214) and age (OR = 1.031). Decision trees showed a 130 mmHg SBP was an efficient threshold to propose HBPM with a higher probability to detect MH. Subsequent variables were male gender and age over 70 in males.
CONCLUSION: To detect masked hypertension, it would be logical to first of all select patients whose office SBP is between 130 and 140 mmHg.
AD
Service de Cardiologie et hypertension artérielle, CHU, Grenoble, Roubaix, HEGP, Paris, France. jmmallion@chu-grenoble.fr
PMID
35
TI
Prognostic value of white-coat and masked hypertension diagnosed by ambulatory monitoring in initially untreated subjects: an updated meta analysis.
AU
Pierdomenico SD, Cuccurullo F
SO
Am J Hypertens. 2011;24(1):52.
 
BACKGROUND: The prognostic relevance of white-coat hypertension (WCH) and masked hypertension (MH) is controversial. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis on the prognostic value of WCH and MH diagnosed by ambulatory monitoring in initially untreated subjects.
METHODS: We searched for articles evaluating cardiovascular outcome in WCH or MH or sustained hypertension (SH) in comparison with normotension, investigating untreated subjects at baseline or performing separate analysis for untreated or treated subjects, and reporting adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: Eight studies were identified. Five whole studies and untreated groups of three others were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled population consisted of 7,961 subjects who experienced 696 events. When compared with normotension, the overall adjusted HR was 0.96 (95% CI 0.65-1.42) for WCH (P = 0.85), 2.09 (1.55-2.81) for MH (P = 0.0001), and 2.59 (2.0-3.35) for SH (P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference between WCH and normotension according to normotensive subjects source (same or different study population) and follow-up length. Where reported, prevalence of drug therapy was higher in subjects with WCH than in those with normotension at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular risk is not significantly different between WCH and normotension, regardless of normotensive population type and follow-up length. However, at follow-up drug therapy was more frequent in WCH than in normotension and its possible impact on outcome should be evaluated in future studies. MH shows significantly higher risk than normotension, although the best way for its detection and treatment remains to be established.
AD
Dipartimento di Medicina e Scienze dell'Invecchiamento, Università"Gabriele d'Annunzio", Chieti, Italy. pierdomenico@unich.it
PMID
36
TI
Target organ damage and masked hypertension in the general population: the Finn-Home study.
AU
Hänninen MR, Niiranen TJ, Puukka PJ, Kesäniemi YA, Kähönen M, Jula AM
SO
J Hypertens. 2013 Jun;31(6):1136-43.
 
BACKGROUND: The relation of masked hypertension to target organ damage has very seldom been investigated in a general population.
METHODS: An unselected population cohort (n = 1989 of which 1540 were not treated for hypertension) underwent office (duplicate measurements on one visit by a nurse) and home (duplicate measurements on 7 days) blood pressure (BP) measurements and evaluation of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (ECG-LVH, n = 1989/1540), carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT, n = 758/592), and pulse wave velocity (PWV, n = 237/158). ECG-LVH was diagnosed using Cornell voltage criteria. PWV was measured using whole-body impedance cardiography. Masked hypertension was defined as office BP less than 140/90 mmHg with home BP at least 135/85 mmHg and white-coat hypertension as office BP at least 140/90 mmHg and home BP less than 135/85 mmHg.
RESULTS: Masked and sustained hypertensive individuals had significantly higher age-adjusted and sex-adjusted Cornell voltage, cIMT, and PWV than normotensive individuals. White-coat hypertensive patients had higher age-adjusted and sex-adjusted Cornell voltage than normotensive individuals but significantly lower Cornell voltage and PWV than sustained hypertensive patients. The differences in Cornell voltage and PWV remained significant after adjustment for confounding factors. However, all differences became nonsignificant after adjustment for systolic home BP.
CONCLUSION: Masked and sustained hypertension is accompanied by increased risk for hypertensive target organ damage, whereas white-coat hypertension seems to be a more benign phenomenon.
AD
Population Studies Unit, Department of Chronic Disease Prevention, National Institute for Health and Welfare, 20720 Turku, Finland. marjo-riitta.hanninen@utu.fi
PMID