| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
- Clark, Christopher E., et al.
(författare)
-
Associations Between Systolic Interarm Differences in Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes and Mortality : Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis, Development and Validation of a Prognostic Algorithm: The INTERPRESS-IPD Collaboration
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 77:2, s. 650-661
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Systolic interarm differences in blood pressure have been associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease. We undertook individual participant data meta-analyses to (1) quantify independent associations of systolic interarm difference with mortality and cardiovascular events; (2) develop and validate prognostic models incorporating interarm difference, and (3) determine whether interarm difference remains associated with risk after adjustment for common cardiovascular risk scores. We searched for studies recording bilateral blood pressure and outcomes, established agreements with collaborating authors, and created a single international dataset: the Inter-arm Blood Pressure Difference - Individual Participant Data (INTERPRESS-IPD) Collaboration. Data were merged from 24 studies (53 827 participants). Systolic interarm difference was associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: continuous hazard ratios 1.05 (95% CI, 1.02-1.08) and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.02-1.11), respectively, per 5 mm Hg systolic interarm difference. Hazard ratios for all-cause mortality increased with interarm difference magnitude from a ≥5 mm Hg threshold (hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.01-1.14]). Systolic interarm differences per 5 mm Hg were associated with cardiovascular events in people without preexisting disease, after adjustment for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.08]), Framingham (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.01-1.08]), or QRISK cardiovascular disease risk algorithm version 2 (QRISK2) (hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.06-1.18]) cardiovascular risk scores. Our findings confirm that systolic interarm difference is associated with increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and cardiovascular events. Blood pressure should be measured in both arms during cardiovascular assessment. A systolic interarm difference of 10 mm Hg is proposed as the upper limit of normal. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42015031227.
|
|
| 27. |
- Clark, Christopher E., et al.
(författare)
-
Higher Arm Versus Lower Arm Systolic Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Outcomes : a Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data From the INTERPRESS-IPD Collaboration
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 0194-911X. ; 79:10, s. 2328-2335
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend measuring blood pressure (BP) in both arms, adopting the higher arm readings for diagnosis and management. Data to support this recommendation are lacking. We evaluated associations of higher and lower arm systolic BPs with diagnostic and treatment thresholds, and prognosis in hypertension, using data from the Inter-arm Blood Pressure Difference - Individual Participant Data Collaboration. METHODS: One-stage multivariable Cox regression models, stratified by study, were used to examine associations of higher or lower reading arm BPs with cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular events, in individual participant data meta-analyses pooled from 23 cohorts. Cardiovascular events were modelled for Framingham and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk scores. Model fit was compared throughout using Akaike information criteria. Proportions reclassified across guideline recommended intervention thresholds were also compared. RESULTS: We analyzed 53 172 participants: mean age 60 years; 48% female. Higher arm BP, compared with lower arm, reclassified 12% of participants at either 130 or 140 mm Hg systolic BP thresholds (both P<0.001). Higher arm BP models fitted better for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and cardiovascular events (all P<0.001). Higher arm BP models better predicted cardiovascular events with Framingham and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk scores (both P<0.001) and reclassified 4.6% and 3.5% of participants respectively to higher risk categories compared with lower arm BPs). CONCLUSIONS: Using BP from higher instead of lower reading arms reclassified 12% of people over thresholds used to diagnose hypertension. All prediction models performed better when using the higher arm BP. Both arms should be measured for accurate diagnosis and management of hypertension.
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
- Cowie, MR, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical applications of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) testing
- 2003
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 24:19, s. 1710-1718
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Many claims have been made in recent years regarding the utility of plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) concentration measurements in the diagnosis, risk stratification and monitoring of patients with heart failure. This paper summarizes the current evidence and provides guidance for practising clinicians. Overall, plasma BNP testing appears to be of most value in the diagnostic arena, where it is likely to improve the performance of non-specialist physicians in diagnosing heart failure. In clinical practice, BNP testing is best used as a 'rule out' test for suspected cases of new heart failure in breathless patients presenting to either the outpatient or emergency care settings, it is not a replacement for echocardiography and full cardiological assessment, which will be required for patients with an elevated BNP concentration. Although work is ongoing in establishing the 'normal' values of BNP, heart failure appears to be highly unlikely below a plasma concentration of 100 pg/ml. However, as BNP levels rise with age and are affected by gender, comorbidity and drug therapy, the plasma BNP measurement should not be used in isolation from the clinical context.
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
