Blood Pressure Monitoring最新文献

We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of B.Well PRO-33 (B.Well, Widnau, Switzerland) oscillometric device for professional office measurement of blood pressure (BP) on the upper arm in the general population in accordance with the Amendment 2.2024-01 of the Standard 81060-2:2018 by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 2:2024). Study participants were recruited according to the age, gender, BP, and cuff distribution requirements of the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 2:2024 in the general population using the sequential BP measurement method on the same arm. The test device was used with one universal cuff for arm circumferences of 22-42 cm. We chose aneroid sphygmomanometers Riester Big Ben Square Desk (Rudolf Riester, Jungingen, Germany) with small, medium and large cuffs and Welch Allyn 767 Desk (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY, USA) with a large adult cuff for arm circumferences of 22-37 and 38-42 cm, respectively, as control devices. We enrolled 112 study subjects, of whom 85 were analyzed. For validation criterion 1, the mean ± SD of the differences between the readings of the tested device and reference BP (systolic/diastolic; threshold ≤5 ± 8 mmHg; N = 255) was 1.7 ± 5.4/1.8 ± 5.7 mmHg. For validation criterion 2, the SD of the mean BP difference between the tested device and reference BP readings per subject (systolic/diastolic; threshold ≤ 6.73/6.71 mmHg; N = 85) was 4.7/4.7 mmHg. B.Well PRO-33 professional office BP monitor met the requirements of the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 2:2024 for the general population, and therefore can be recommended for clinical use.

Objective: Arterial hypertension is a major global cause of cardiovascular disease, a risk heightened by postmenopausal physiological changes. Although aerobic exercise is protective, its optimal intensity, duration, and supervision for hypertensive postmenopausal women remain unclear. This study, therefore, compares a supervised intensive aerobic program with a home-based regimen, assessing their effects on key cardiac health indicators in this population.

Methods: In this single-center pilot randomized controlled trial, we enrolled 31 postmenopausal women. Participants were divided into two groups: one underwent a 6-week supervised intensive aerobic exercise program, and the other followed a home-based exercise regimen. Key outcome measures included cardiorespiratory endurance, heart rate variability, and blood pressure variability. Outcome measures were evaluated at weeks 6 and 12. Intra-group and inter-group comparisons were evaluated using appropriate statistical methods.

Results: After 12 weeks, the supervised exercise group showed significant improvements in VO2max (P = 0.003), metabolic equivalents (METs) (P = 0.002), and standard deviation of normal-to-normal intervals (SDNN) values (P = 0.034) at both the 6th and 12th weeks. However, the sole significant inter-group difference was a greater reduction in 24-hour SBP variability (SBP-SD) in the supervised arm (Δ -0.95 ± 1.15 vs. + 1.54 ± 0.94 mmHg; P = 0.041), driven mainly by the week 6-12 interval (P = 0.004).

Conclusion: Supervised intensive aerobic exercise produced clear within-group gains in VO₂ max, METs, and SDNN, and it reduced 24-hour SBP variability relative to home-based walking. Although between-group differences for the primary fitness and autonomic outcomes were not statistically significant in this pilot, the pattern suggests that a supervised, tailored program may confer additional clinical benefit and merits evaluation in a larger trial.

This study aimed to assess the accuracy of the CONTEC08C automated oscillometric upper-arm sphygmomanometer in adults for clinical use in accordance with the ISO 81060-2:2018 standard. A total of 90 normotensive and hypertensive participants aged 18-75 years were recruited, and 85 were analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of the CONTEC08C oscillometric upper-arm sphygmomanometer using the same arm sequential validation method and a standardized protocol. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) of the differences between the test device and reference blood pressure (BP) measurements was 0.5 ± 3 mmHg for SBP and 0.4 ± 3.5 mmHg for DBP, meeting validation criterion 1. For validation criterion 2, the SD of the averaged differences between the test device and reference BP measurements per subject was 1.81/2.41 mmHg (systolic/diastolic). The CONTEC08C oscillometric upper-arm blood pressure monitor fulfilled the requirements of the ISO 81060-2:2018 standard in adults in the clinical setting and can therefore be recommended for safe clinical use.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of the Omron HBP-1320 electronic blood pressure (BP) monitor for ambulatory BP measurement in both pediatric and adult populations according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) (ISO 81060-2:2018/Amd 1:2020) protocol.

Methods: Subjects who met age, gender, BP, and cuff distribution criteria specified by the AAMI/ESH/ISO (ISO 81060-2:2018/Amd1:2020) protocol were recruited for this study. BP measurements were performed using the same-arm sequential measurement method. The test device was equipped with cuffs suitable for arm circumferences ranging from 12.0 to 42.0 cm.

Results: A total of 87 participants were initially recruited, with 85 (35 children and 50 adults) included in the final analysis after excluding two participants. The mean age of all participants was 38.1 ± 28.98 years, with children averaging 6.7 ± 2.23 years and adults 60.1 ± 15.39 years. For validation criterion 1, the mean ± SD of differences between the test device and reference BP measurements was 2.3 ± 5.47 mmHg for SBP and 1.3 ± 5.65 mmHg for DBP. Both mean differences were ≤5 mmHg, and SDs ≤ 8 mmHg, meeting the criterion. For validation criterion 2, the mean differences were 2.3 ± 3.93 mmHg for SBP and 1.3 ± 5.13 mmHg for DBP, satisfying the thresholds of ≤6.55 mmHg for SBP and ≤6.82 mmHg for DBP.

Conclusion: The Omron HBP-1320 electronic BP monitor meets the requirements of the AAMI/ESH/ISO (ISO 81060-2:2018/Amd 1:2020) validation standard for adults and children.

Objective: To investigate the associations between phenotypic age acceleration (PhenoAgeAccel) and all-cause/cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related mortality in hypertensive patients.

Methods: We analyzed data from 14 352 hypertensive adults (≥20 years) in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010. PhenoAge was calculated using chronological age and nine biomarkers (albumin, creatinine, glucose, C-reactive protein, lymphocyte%, mean cell volume, red blood cell distribution width, alkaline phosphatase, and white blood cell count). PhenoAgeAccel was derived as residuals from linear regression of PhenoAge on chronological age. Participants were stratified by PhenoAge [<46.6792 (792-64.774 (T1-T2), ≥64.774 (≥T2)] and PhenoAgeAccel [<-4.3382 (382-0.9896 (T1-T2), ≥0.9896 (≥T2)] tertiles. Cox proportional hazards models assessed mortality risks.

Results: Increased all-cause mortality was observed in hypertensive patients with PhenoAge in T1-T2 group [hazards ratio = 4.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.79-5.06] and greater than or equal to T2 (hazards ratio = 14.22, 95% CI: 12.32-16.43). Significant association between PhenoAgeAccel greater than or equal to T2 and increased risk of all-cause mortality in hypertensive patients (hazards ratio = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.29-1.55) was identified. PhenoAge of T1-T2 (hazards ratio = 5.15, 95% CI: 3.86-6.86) and greater than or equal to T2 (hazards ratio = 20.20, 95% CI: 14.98-27.26) were related to increased CVD-related mortality in hypertensive patients. Increased risk of CVD-related mortality was identified in hypertensive patients with PhenoAgeAccel greater than or equal to T2 (hazards ratio = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.17-1.56).

Conclusion: Elevated PhenoAge and PhenoAgeAccel significantly predict higher all-cause and CVD mortality in hypertension, supporting clinical risk stratification.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of OMRON J7136 and HEM-7361T oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitors in the general population according to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 81060-2:2018 and amendment (Amd) 1:2020 standard.

Method: Subjects were recruited to fulfill the age, gender, BP, and cuff distributions of the ISO Universal Standard in the general population using the same arm sequential BP measurement method. Three cuffs of the OMRON J7136 were used for arm circumference 17-22 cm (small), 22-32 cm (medium), and 32-42 cm (large). A single cuff 17-36 cm was used on the OMRON HEM-7361T.

Results: The mean ± SD of the differences between the OMRON J7136 and reference BP readings was -2.14 ± 6.45/-1.43 ± 5.88 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for criterion 1. The SD of the average BP differences between the OMRON J7136 and reference BP per subject was 5.49/5.36 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for criterion 2. For the study on the OMRON HEM-7361T, the corresponding values were -2.56 ± 6.35/-3.18 ± 5.67 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for criterion 1 and 5.33/5.32 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for criterion 2.

Conclusion: The OMRON J7136 and HEM-7361T BP monitors both fulfilled the requirements of the ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020) in the general population and can be recommended for self-measurement in adults.

The current 2024 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension defines blood pressure less than 115/65 mmHg by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as nonelevated, blood pressures in-between 115-129 and 65-79 mmHg as elevated blood pressure, and hypertension as ≥130/80 mmHg. There, might be patients seeking medical attention for the symptoms, apparently nonspecific but suggestive of hypertension with optimal, or not elevated, or elevated blood pressure values. A female patient with complaints of headache and dizziness lasting for 2 months has been evaluated in cardiology outpatient clinic and assessed by ABPM. It has been told that she had previously blood pressure of 90-100/50-60 mmHg and was suffering from headache when systolic blood pressure exceeds 110 mmHg. Her 24-h ABPM revealed systolic and diastolic blood pressure as 106/63 mmHg showing nighttime decrease compared with daytime pressures (98/59 mmHg and 108/68 mmHg, respectively). Thereafter, she was instructed to keep continuing the life-style modification and given to beta-blocker (bisoprolol 5 mg) as an antihypertensive treatment. At the end of the 2 weeks of follow-up period, she was headache-free and was feeling comfortable and well with a mean home blood pressure of 98/56 mmHg. We have presented prosperous antihypertensive treatment of a female patient suffering from headache and dizziness with a numerically normal or nonelevated blood pressure. In the presence of symptoms and having not elevated or elevated blood pressure levels, patients' history on previous measure of blood pressure might facilitate our decision-making process.

Objective: Unobserved automated office blood pressure (uAOBP) measurement is better correlated to daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (dABPM) than traditional office blood pressure (BP) measurements. However, prolonged uAOBP duration may underestimate BP levels. We aimed to determine the duration of uAOBP that has the lowest proportion of white-coat hypertension (WCH) or masked hypertension (MH) compared with the gold-standard using dABPM in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Additionally, we examined variables associated with discrepancy between uAOBP and dABPM.

Methods: A total of 135 patients with T2DM underwent dABPM as well as uAOBP. uAOBP recordings were taken in the sitting position without prior rest for 24 min at 3-min intervals. Hypertension was defined as blood pressure ≥135/85 mmHg. Multiple uAOBP measurement intervals were compared with dABPM by the proportions of patients with WCH, MH, or consistent classification.

Results: Participants had a mean age of 57.7 years, 38% were female, and 66% used antihypertensive drugs. Average dABPM was 126.9/79.5 mmHg. Extension of uAOBP measurements from 3 to 24 min reduced the proportion with WCH significantly (20.7 vs. 27.4%, P  = 0.012), with an identical proportion of MH (4.4 vs. 3.7%). Higher BMI, higher urine albumin-creatinine ratio, and higher education were associated with MH, while WCH was associated with older age and early retirement.

Conclusion: Extending the duration of uAOBP measurements from 3 to 24 min in patients with T2DM increased the proportion of patients with consistent classification by reducing WCH without increasing MH, but clinically relevant individual differences between uAOBP measurements and dABPM remained.