Search

Introduction: The Predicting Out-of-Office Blood Pressure in the Clinic (PROOF-BP) algorithm accurately estimates out-of-office BP to guide ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) among adults in the UK and Canada with suspected high BP. We tested the validity of PROOF-BP in a diverse US population and developed a US-specific algorithm. Methods: We pooled data from four US studies (CARDIA, JHS, Masked Hypertension Study, and Improving Detection of Hypertension Study) that assessed both office BP and 24-hour ABPM. We included participants with >=2 office and >=10 daytime ambulatory BP readings. PROOF-BP estimates the difference between office systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) and daytime ambulatory SBP and DBP using clinic BP measurements and patient characteristics. We examined the performance of PROOF-BP in US data and then used multivariable linear regression to develop a new algorithm optimized for the US population. We tested the ability of PROOF-BP to discriminate high awake ambulatory SBP and DBP (SBP/DBP >=130/80 mm Hg) using the area under the receiver-operator curve (AUROC). Models were developed in a 70% randomly selected derivation set and tested in a 30% validation set. The optimal predicted ambulatory BP thresholds were defined as those that resulted in the smallest proportion of individuals recommended for ABPM with an overall classification error Results: We analyzed 3,080 individuals with a mean (SD) age of 52.0 (11.9) years, 38% were male, and 54% were black. Mean (SD) office SBP/DBP was 121.8 (16.6)/75.3 (9.8) mm Hg, mean (SD) awake ambulatory SBP/DBP was 127.3 (13.5)/78.6 (8.8) mm Hg, and 51% had awake ABPM >=130/80 mm Hg. The discrimination for high awake ABPM was similar between the existing (AUROC SBP = 0.77, DBP = 0.73) and US-specific models (AUROC SBP = 0.77, DBP = 0.72). Optimal predicted ambulatory BP thresholds with the US-specific algorithm were 125-134/75-84 mm Hg, resulting in 55% of the pooled cohort recommended for ABPM; compared to 66% recommended by the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines. Conclusions: Both the original and US-specific PROOF-BP algorithms predicted high out-of-office BP among US adults. PROOF-BP may be used to guide clinical decisions and resource allocation among individuals considered for ABPM.

Purpose: Patients who present with concurrent heart failure (HF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have an increased risk of mortality, but changes in clinical practice have improved clinical outcomes. We sought to examine recent trends in concurrent HF and ACS hospitalizations in the United States (US) through review of published literature. Methods: We searched the Medline and PubMed databases for studies published after January 1, 2000 reporting the hospitalizations for HF with concurrent acute coronary syndromes. We included studies performed in the US or with at least 25% US participants, that reported the proportion with concurrent HF and ACS, and used a clinical definition of HF (e.g. Killip Class II or III, NYHA Class, or Framingham Criteria). Studies were reviewed by and data was extracted using a standardized form. We extracted study and patient characteristics, definition of HF, and rates of concurrent HF and ACS hospitalizations. We categorized included studies by ACS type: (1) non-specific myocardial infarction (MI) or ACS, (2) non-ST elevation (NSTE) MI or NSTE-ACS, or (3) ST elevation (STE) MI. We descriptively examined recent trends in hospitalizations for concurrent HF and ACS over time; rates reported for multiple time periods or ACS types were considered separately. Results: We identified 23 observational studies, systematic reviews, and randomized clinical trials. Of these, we excluded 13 due to non-US populations, use of non-clinical definitions of HF (i.e., diagnosis codes), or not reporting rates of concurrent HF and ACS. Of the 10 included studies, 7 reported concurrent HF with non-specific MI or ACS from 1975 through 2005 across multiple registries and literature reviews. Rates ranged from 12.5% to 48.0% with no clear time-related trends. We identified 3 studies reporting concurrent HF with NSTEMI or NSTE-ACS from pooled analysis or the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) registry from 1994 to 2008. Reported rates ranged from 8.2%-15.7% for studies starting in the 1990s with one study reporting and 6.1% in 2005. We identified 4 studies reporting concurrent HF with STEMI, including a pooled analysis, the GRACE registry, and a clinical trial. Rates of concurrent HF with STEMI appeared to decrease over time from 32.5% in 1990 to 1998, 15.6%-19.5% from 1999 to 2001, and 2.6%-11.0% in 2005. Conclusion: Our literature review found that there may be a decrease in concurrent HF and STEMI hospitalizations in recent decades, but no apparent trends with other types of ACS. This may be related to emphasis on early revascularization strategies, improved primary prevention, and/or earlier time to presentation due to increasing public awareness.. However, there was a dearth of data reporting concurrent HF and ACS hospitalization within the last decade. Further research is needed to understand the impact of multiple changes in clinical practice on secular trends.

Introduction: The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure (BP) guideline uses lower clinic and out-of-clinic BP thresholds to define hypertension compared to previous US guidelines. Using these thresholds, we determined the associations between white coat hypertension (WCH) and masked hypertension with cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and mortality. Methods: We included 993 African Americans participating in the Jackson Heart Study who had clinic BP measured during their baseline study visit between 2000 and 2004 and underwent ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). We defined normotension, WCH/white coat effect (WCE), masked/masked uncontrolled hypertension, and sustained hypertension using clinic BP and mean awake BP on ABPM (Table). CVD events (i.e., coronary heart disease and stroke; n=107), and all-cause mortality (n=185) were adjudicated from baseline through December 2014 and December 2016, respectively. Results: The mean age of participants was 59 years and 68% were female. Among those not taking antihypertensive medication, 38% had normotension, 27% had WCH, 33% had masked hypertension, and 31% had sustained hypertension. WCH, masked hypertension, and sustained hypertension were each associated with an increased risk for CVD and mortality compared to normotension (Table). Among those taking antihypertensive medication, 26% had controlled normotension, 25% had a WCE, 45% had masked uncontrolled hypertension, and 39% had treated sustained hypertension. Masked uncontrolled hypertension was associated with a higher risk for CVD and a lower risk for mortality compared to controlled normotension. WCE was not associated with CVD events or all-cause mortality. Conclusions: According to the ACC/AHA BP guideline, WCH and masked hypertension are common among African American adults. ABPM could have an important role in guiding antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification to reduce CVD and mortality risk among African Americans.

We read with great interest the study by Fontana et al1 in a large cohort of subjects with cardiac amyloidosis demonstrating the association of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on magnetic resonance imaging with increasing amyloid infiltration of the myocardium, as measured by extracellular volume, and the incremental prognostic value associated with transmural LGE on survival. LGE is pathologically associated with amyloid infiltration of the myocardium and concomitant fibrosis. Thus, LGE is indicative of pathological hypertrophy and has now been shown to have prognostic significance in amyloid. Accordingly, we hypothesize that a novel …