Blood pressure variability — 15 years later

Blood pressure variability (BPV) has been studied for a long time, and recently important new information has been obtained about the prognostic value of BPV and the influence of antihypertensive therapy on it. There are three groups of VBP characteristics that are most important from a practical point of view: 24-hour BPV, BPV of average duration and visit-to-visit variability (VVV). VVV has attracted the attention of scientists in recent years. In a recent study in patients who participated in the ASCOT-BPLA cohort (mean follow-up 17.4 years) it was shown that 1) SBP VVV proved to be a strong predictor of cardiovascular complications (CVC), independent of mean BP (and possibly stronger than the latter) including in patients with well-controlled AH; 2) the CVC risk (including stroke and coronary events) remained significantly lower in the amlodipine treatment group. This finding seems particularly interesting in view of the fact that during such a long follow-up period many patients changed their treatment regimen; baseline values of office BP in both groups did not differ significantly. Thus, the independent prognostic value of VVV has received new convincing confirmation. Amlodipine may be the optimal drug for the treatment of patients with elevated BPV, but further studies are required to prove this point.

1. Daskalopoulou SS, Rabi DM, Zarnke KB, e al. The 2015 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for blood pressure measurement, diagnosis, assessment of risk, prevention, and treatment of hypertension. Can J Cardiol. 2015;31(5):549-68. DOI:10.1016/j.cjca.2015.02.016.

2. Gorbunov VM. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: Current aspects. M.: Logosfera. 2015. (In Russ.)

3. Parati G, Bilo G, Kollias A, et al. Blood pressure variability: methodological aspects, clinical relevance and practical indications for management — a European Society of Hypertension position paper. J Hypertens. 2023;41(4):527-44. DOI:10.1097/HJH.0000000000003363.

4. Parati G, Croce A, Bilo G. Blood pressure variability: no longer a mASCOT for research nerds. Eur Heart J. 2024;45(13):1170-2. DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae023.

5. Gupta A, Whiteley WN, Godec T, et al. Legacy benefits of blood pressure treatment on cardiovascular events are primarily mediated by improved blood pressure variability: the ASCOT trial. Eur Heart J. 2024;45(13):1159-69. DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad814.

6. Poulter NR. Blood pressure variability: a new challenge in blood pressure measurement. In: Improving Management of Hypertension: Reconsidering Efficacy Assessment. Springer Science. 2012:35-46.

7. Rogoza AN, Nikolskiy VP, Oshchepkova EV, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertension (methodological issues). M., 1996. (In Russ.)

8. Rogoza AN, Oschchepkova EV, Tsagareishvili EV, Gorieva ShB. Modern non-invasive methods of blood pressure measurement for the diagnosis of arterial hypertension and assessment of the effectiveness of antihypertensive therapy. Manual for physicians. 2007. M.: Medika. (In Russ.)

9. Mena L, Pintos S, Queipo NV. A reliable index for the prognostic significance of blood pressure variability. J Hypertens. 2003;23(3):505-11. DOI:10.1097/01.hjh.0000160205.81652.5a.

10. Stolarz-Skrzypek K, Thijs L, Richart T, et al. Blood pressure variability in relation to outcome in the International Database of Ambulatory blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome. Hypertens Res. 2010;33:757-66. DOI:10.1038/hr.2010.110.

11. Bilo G, Dolan E, O’Brien E. The impact of systolic and diastolic blood pressure variability on mortality is age dependent: Data from the Dublin Outcome Study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2020;27(4):355-64. DOI:10.1177/2047487319872572.

12. Palatini P, Reboldi G, Beilin LJ, et al. Added predictive value of night-time blood pressure variability for cardiovascular events and mortality: The Ambulatory Blood Pressure-International Study. Hypertension. 2014;64(3):487-93. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03694.

13. Hansen TW, Thijs L, Li Y, et al. Prognostic value of reading-to-reading blood pressure variability over 24 hours in 8938 subjects from 11 populations. Hypertension. 2010;55:1049-57. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.140798.

14. Kikuya M, Ohkubo T, Metoki H, et al. Day by day variability of blood pressure and heart rate at home as a novel predictor of prognosis: The Ohasama study. Hypertension. 2008;52(6):1045-50. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.104620.

15. Johansson JK, Niiranen TJ, Puukka PJ, Jula AM. Prognostic value of the variability in home-measured blood pressure and heart rate: The Finn-Home Study. Hypertension. 2012;59(2):212-8. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.178657.

16. Platonova EV, Gorbunov VM, Shalnova SA, Deev AD. Potential and paradoxes of home blood pressure variability. Kardiologiia. 2015;55(8):68-75. (In Russ.) DOI:10.18565/cardio.2015.8.68-75.

17. Schutte R, Thijs L, Liu YP, et al. Within subject blood pressure level — not variability — predicts fatal and nonfatal outcomes in a general population. Hypertension. 2012;60(5):1138-47. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.202143.

18. Rothwell PM, Coull AJ, Giles MF, et al.; Oxford Vascular Study. Change in stroke incidence, mortality, case-fatality, severity, and risk factors in Oxfordshire, UK from 1981 to 2004 (Oxford Vascular Study). Lancet. 2004;363(9425):1925-33. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16405-2

19. Farrell B, Godwin J, Richards S, Warlow C. The United Kingdom transient ischaemic attack (UK-TIA) aspirin trial: final results. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1991;54(12):1044-54. DOI:10.1136/jnnp.54.12.1044.

20. The European Stroke Prevention Study (ESPS). Principal end-points. The ESPS Group. Lancet. 1987;330(8572):1351-4.

21. The Dutch TIA Study Group; van Gijn J, Algra A, Kappelle J, et al. A comparison of two doses of aspirin (30 mg vs 283 mg a day) in patient after a transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1991;325(18):1261-6. DOI:10.1056/NEJM199110313251801.

22. Poulter NR, Wedel H, Dahlöf B, et al.; ASCOT investigators. Role of blood pressure and other variables in the differential cardiovascular events rates noted in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial — Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA). Lancet. 2005;366(9489):907-13. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67186-3.

23. Rothwell PM, Howard SC, Dolan E, et al. Prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure and episodic hypertension. Lancet. 2010;375(9718):895-905. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60308-X.

24. De Havenon A, Petersen N, Wolcott Z, et al. Effect of dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers on blood pressure variability in the SPRINT trial: A treatment effects approach. J Hypertens. 2022;40(3):462-9. DOI:10.1097/HJH.0000000000003033.

25. Sato N, Saij Y, Sasagawa Y, et al.; CAMUI Investigators. Visit-to-visit variability and seasonal variation in blood pressure: Combination of Antihypertensive Therapy in the Elderly, Multicenter Investigation (CAMUI) Trial subanalysis. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2015;37(5):411-9. DOI:10.3109/10641963.2014.995802.

26. Zhang Y, Agnoletti D, Safar ME, Blacher J. Effect of antihypertensive agents on blood pressure variability: The Natrilix SR versus candesartan and amlodipine in the reduction of systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients (X-CELLENT) study. Hypertension. 2011; 58(2):155-60. DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.174383.

27. de la Sierra A, Mateu A, Gorostidi M, et al. Antihypertensive therapy and short-term blood pressure variability. J Hypertens. 2021;39(2):349-55. DOI:10.1097/HJH.0000000000002618.