We have located links that may give you full text access.
Ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring for cardiovascular disease risk evaluation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.
Journal of Hypertension 2023 September 15
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to systematically review the level of evidence based on prospective cohort studies investigating the role of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) and home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction.
METHODS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. The Der Simonian and Laird's random-effects model with standard error adjustment using the Knapp-Hartung method was used.
RESULTS: SBP from ABPM and HBPM was significantly and positively associated with CVD risk [combined hazard ratio per 1-SD SBP, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.32, 1.19-1.45, I2 = 35.8%, and 1.30, 95% CI: 1.11-1.49, I2 = 79.1%, respectively], after adjusting for office BP levels and other potential confounders. DBP from both ABPM and HBPM was positively associated with CVD risk (combined hazard ratio per 1-SD DBP, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.01-1.29, I2 = 73.1% and 1.21, 1.05-1.37, I2 = 84.5%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: BP either from ABPM or HBPM could predict CVD risk. As so, at least one of out-of-office BP measurements have to be taken into account during the evaluation of the hypertensive population.
METHODS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. The Der Simonian and Laird's random-effects model with standard error adjustment using the Knapp-Hartung method was used.
RESULTS: SBP from ABPM and HBPM was significantly and positively associated with CVD risk [combined hazard ratio per 1-SD SBP, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.32, 1.19-1.45, I2 = 35.8%, and 1.30, 95% CI: 1.11-1.49, I2 = 79.1%, respectively], after adjusting for office BP levels and other potential confounders. DBP from both ABPM and HBPM was positively associated with CVD risk (combined hazard ratio per 1-SD DBP, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.01-1.29, I2 = 73.1% and 1.21, 1.05-1.37, I2 = 84.5%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: BP either from ABPM or HBPM could predict CVD risk. As so, at least one of out-of-office BP measurements have to be taken into account during the evaluation of the hypertensive population.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Restrictive fluid resuscitation in septic shock patients has lower mortality and organ dysfunction rates than standard therapy.Shock 2023 November 11
Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2023 November 9
Euglycemic Ketoacidosis in Two Patients Without Diabetes After Introduction of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.Diabetes Care 2023 November 22
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app