Home blood pressure monitoring is better predictor of cardiovascular disease and target organ damage than office blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Current Cardiology Reports

Volumn 15, Issue 11, 2013, Pages

  Fuchs, Sandra C ^a,b   De Mello, Renato G B ^b   Fuchs, Felipe C ^c  

^a HOSPITAL DE CLÍNICAS DE PORTO ALEGRE   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL   (Brazil)

^c MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cardiovascular disease; Cardiovascular outcomes; Home blood pressure monitoring; Hypertension; Office blood pressure; Target organ damage

Indexed keywords

BRAIN NATRIURETIC PEPTIDE;

ALBUMINURIA; ARTERIAL WALL THICKNESS; BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; CAROTID ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASE; GLOMERULUS FILTRATION RATE; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE HYPERTROPHY; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE MASS; HOME MONITORING; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; MORTALITY; OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; PROTEINURIA; PULSE WAVE; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; FEMALE; HYPERTENSION; KIDNEY FUNCTION TEST; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; URINE;

AGED; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PRESSURE DETERMINATION; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, AMBULATORY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; KIDNEY FUNCTION TESTS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OFFICE VISITS; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROTEINURIA;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84886897229     PISSN: 15233782     EISSN: 15343170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11886-013-0413-z     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet. 2002;360:1903-13. (Pubitemid 35472129)
2. Shimbo D, Pickering TG, Spruill TM, Abraham D, Schwartz JE, Gerin W. Relative utility of home, ambulatory, and office blood pressures in the prediction of end-organ damage. Am J Hypertens. 2007;20:476-82. (Pubitemid 46678715)
3. Stergiou GS, Argyraki KK, Moyssakis I, Mastorantonakis SE, Achimastos AD, Karamanos VG, et al. Home blood pressure is as reliable as ambulatory blood pressure in predicting target-organ damage in hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 2007;20:616-21. (Pubitemid 46777257)
4. • Bliziotis IA, Destounis A, Stergiou GS. Home vs ambulatory and office blood pressure in predicting target organ damage in hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens. 2012;30:1289-99. This systematic review addressed HBPM vs OBP as predictors of LVMI and several parameters of target organ damage.
5. Sheikh S, Sinha AD, Agarwal R. Home blood pressure monitoring: how good a predictor of long-term risk? Curr Hypertens Rep. 2011;13:192-9.
6. Ward AM, Takahashi Pickering TG, Miller NH, Ogedegbe G, et al. Call to action on use and reimbursement for home blood pressure monitoring: a joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association, American Society of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Hypertension. 2008;52:10-29.
7. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289:2560-72. (Pubitemid 37430158)
8. •• Ward AM, Takahashi O, Stevens R, Heneghan C. Home measurement of blood pressure and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. J Hypertens. 2012;30:449-56. This systematic review verified HBPM and OBP as predictors of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, using an appropriate methodology.
9. Fuchs SC, Ferreira-da-Silva AL, Moreira LB, Neyeloff JL, Fuchs FC, Gus M, et al. Efficacy of isolated home blood pressure monitoring for blood pressure control: randomized controlled trial with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring - MONITOR study. J Hypertens. 2012;30:75-80.
10. Picon RV, Fuchs FD, Moreira LB, Fuchs SC. Prevalence of hypertension among elderly persons in urban Brazil: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Am J Hypertens. 2013;26:541-8.
11. Picon RV, Fuchs FD, Moreira LB, Riegel G, Fuchs SC. Trends in prevalence of hypertension in Brazil: a systematic review with meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7:e48255.
12. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:573-7. (Pubitemid 351664504)
13. Freemantle N, Mason JM, Haines A, Eccles MP. CONSORT: an important step toward evidence-based health care. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:81-3. (Pubitemid 27021222)
14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. Open Med. 2009;3:e123-30.
15. Neyeloff JL, Fuchs SC, Moreira LB. Meta-analyses and Forest plots using a Microsoft excel spreadsheet: step-by-step guide focusing on descriptive data analysis. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:52.
16. Yano Y, Hoshide S, Shimizu M, Eguchi K, Ishikawa J, et al. Association of home and ambulatory blood pressure changes with changes in cardiovascular biomarkers during antihypertensive treatment. Am J Hypertens. 2012;25:306-12.
17. Ishikawa J, Hoshide S, Eguchi K, Ishikawa S, Shimada K. Nighttime home blood pressure and the risk of hypertensive target organ damage. Hypertension. 2012;60:921-8.
18. •• Hara A, Tanaka K, Ohkubo T, Kondo T, Kikuya M, et al. Ambulatory versus home versus clinic blood pressure and the association with subclinical cerebrovascular diseases: The Ohasama Study. Hypertension. 2012;59:22-8. This article provided evidence of the independent prognostic value of HBPM vs OBP in assessing cerebrovascular disease, among 1007 subjects of the general population of Ohasama, Japan.
19. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557-60. (Pubitemid 37088507)