Numerous studies addressed the predictive value of the nighttime blood pressure (BP) as captured by ambulatory monitoring. However, arbitrary cutoff limits in dichotomized analyses of continuous variables, data dredging across selected subgroups, extrapolation of cross-sectional studies to prospective outcomes, and lack of comprehensive adjustments for confounders make interpretation of the literature difficult. We reviewed prospective studies with total mortality or a composite cardiovascular end point as an outcome in relation to the level and the circadian profile of systolic BP. We analyzed studies in hypertensive patients (n=23 856) separately from those in individuals randomly recruited from populations (n=9641). We pooled summary statistics and individual subject data, respectively. In both patients and populations, in analyses in which nighttime BP was additionally adjusted for daytime BP and vice versa, nighttime BP was a stronger predictor than daytime BP. With adjustment for the 24-hour BP, both the night-to-day BP ratio and dipping status remained significant predictors of outcome but added little prognostic value over and beyond the 24-hour BP level. In the absence of conclusive evidence proving that nondipping is a reversible risk factor, the option whether or not to restore the diurnal blood pressure profile to a normal pattern should be left to the clinical judgment of doctors and should be individualized for each patient. Current guidelines on the interpretation of ambulatory BP recording need to be updated.

In previous studies, of which several were underpowered, the relation between cardiovascular outcome and blood pressure (BP) variability was inconsistent. We followed health outcomes in 8938 subjects (mean age: 53.0 years; 46.8% women) randomly recruited from 11 populations. At baseline, we assessed BP variability from the SD and average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings. We computed standardized hazard ratios (HRs) while stratifying by cohort and adjusting for 24-hour BP and other risk factors. Over 11.3 years (median), 1242 deaths (487 cardiovascular) occurred, and 1049, 577, 421, and 457 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular, cardiac, or coronary event or a stroke. Higher diastolic average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted ( P ≤0.03) total (HR: 1.14) and cardiovascular (HR: 1.21) mortality and all types of fatal combined with nonfatal end points (HR: ≥1.07) with the exception of cardiac and coronary events (HR: ≤1.02; P ≥0.58). Higher systolic average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted ( P <0.05) total (HR: 1.11) and cardiovascular (HR: 1.16) mortality and all fatal combined with nonfatal end points (HR: ≥1.07), with the exception of cardiac and coronary events (HR: ≤1.03; P ≥0.54). SD predicted only total and cardiovascular mortality. While accounting for the 24-hour BP level, average real variability in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings added <1% to the prediction of a cardiovascular event. Sensitivity analyses considering ethnicity, sex, age, previous cardiovascular disease, antihypertensive treatment, number of BP readings per recording, or the night:day BP ratio were confirmatory. In conclusion, in a large population cohort, which provided sufficient statistical power, BP variability assessed from 24-hour ambulatory recordings did not contribute much to risk stratification over and beyond 24-hour BP.

We and other investigators previously reported that isolated nocturnal hypertension on ambulatory measurement (INH) clustered with cardiovascular risk factors and was associated with intermediate target organ damage. We investigated whether INH might also predict hard cardiovascular endpoints. We monitored blood pressure (BP) throughout the day and followed health outcomes in 8711 individuals randomly recruited from 10 populations (mean age 54.8 years, 47.0% women). Of these, 577 untreated individuals had INH (daytime BP <135/85 mmHg and night-time BP ≥120/70 mmHg) and 994 untreated individuals had isolated daytime hypertension on ambulatory measurement (IDH; daytime BP ≥135/85 mmHg and night-time BP <120/70 mmHg). During follow-up (median 10.7 years), 1284 deaths (501 cardiovascular) occurred and 1109 participants experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, compared with normotension (n = 3837), INH was associated with a higher risk of total mortality (hazard ratio 1.29, P = 0.045) and all cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.38, P = 0.037). IDH was associated with increases in all cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.46, P = 0.0019) and cardiac endpoints (hazard ratio 1.53, P = 0.0061). Of 577 patients with INH, 457 were normotensive (<140/90 mmHg) on office BP measurement. Hazard ratios associated with INH with additional adjustment for office BP were 1.31 (P = 0.039) and 1.38 (P = 0.044) for total mortality and all cardiovascular events, respectively. After exclusion of patients with office hypertension, these hazard ratios were 1.17 (P = 0.31) and 1.48 (P = 0.034). INH predicts cardiovascular outcome in patients who are normotensive on office or on ambulatory daytime BP measurement.

Previous studies on the prognostic significance of the morning blood pressure surge (MS) produced inconsistent results. Using the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome, we analyzed 5645 subjects (mean age: 53.0 years; 54.0% women) randomly recruited in 8 countries. The sleep-through and the preawakening MS were the differences in the morning blood pressure with the lowest nighttime blood pressure and the preawakening blood pressure, respectively. We computed multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios comparing the risk in ethnic- and sex-specific deciles of the MS relative to the average risk in the whole study population. During follow-up (median: 11.4 years), 785 deaths and 611 fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events occurred. While accounting for covariables and the night:day ratio of systolic pressure, the hazard ratio of all-cause mortality was 1.32 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.59; P =0.004) in the top decile of the systolic sleep-through MS (≥37.0 mm Hg). For cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death, these hazard ratios were 1.18 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.61; P =0.30) and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.11 to 1.80; P =0.005). For all cardiovascular, cardiac, coronary, and cerebrovascular events, the hazard ratios in the top decile of the systolic sleep-through MS were 1.30 (95% CI: 1.06 to 1.60; P =0.01), 1.52 (95% CI: 1.15 to 2.00; P =0.004), 1.45 (95% CI: 1.04 to 2.03; P =0.03), and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.68 to 1.32; P =0.74), respectively. Analysis of the preawakening systolic MS and the diastolic MS generated consistent results. In conclusion, a MS above the 90th percentile significantly and independently predicted cardiovascular outcome and might contribute to risk stratification by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

The significance of white-coat hypertension in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension remains poorly understood. We analyzed subjects from the population-based 11-country International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes database who had daytime ambulatory blood pressure (BP; ABP) and conventional BP (CBP) measurements. After excluding persons with diastolic hypertension by CBP (≥90 mm Hg) or by daytime ABP (≥85 mm Hg), a history of cardiovascular disease, and persons <18 years of age, the present analysis totaled 7295 persons, of whom 1593 had isolated systolic hypertension. During a median follow-up of 10.6 years, there was a total of 655 fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. The analyses were stratified by treatment status. In untreated subjects, those with white-coat hypertension (CBP ≥140/<90 mm Hg and ABP <135/<85 mm Hg) and subjects with normal BP (CBP <140/<90 mm Hg and ABP <135/<85 mm Hg) were at similar risk (adjusted hazard rate: 1.17 [95% CI: 0.87–1.57]; P =0.29). Furthermore, in treated subjects with isolated systolic hypertension, the cardiovascular risk was similar in elevated conventional and normal daytime systolic BP as compared with those with normal conventional and normal daytime BPs (adjusted hazard rate: 1.10 [95% CI: 0.79–1.53]; P =0.57). However, both treated isolated systolic hypertension subjects with white-coat hypertension (adjusted hazard rate: 2.00; [95% CI: 1.43–2.79]; P <0.0001) and treated subjects with normal BP (adjusted hazard rate: 1.98 [95% CI: 1.49–2.62]; P <0.0001) were at higher risk as compared with untreated normotensive subjects. In conclusion, subjects with sustained hypertension who have their ABP normalized on antihypertensive therapy but with residual white-coat effect by CBP measurement have an entity that we have termed, “treated normalized hypertension.” Therefore, one should be cautious in applying the term “white-coat hypertension” to persons receiving antihypertensive treatment.