Journal of Korean medical science · 2025
Impact of Clinic Blood Pressure Target on the Prevalence and Predictors of Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension and White-Coat Uncontrolled Hypertension.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Hyun-Jin, Lee Yonggu, Shin Jeong-Hun, Kim Ju Han, Hwang Sun Ho, Kim Woo Shik, Park Sungha, Rhee Sang Jae, Lee Eun Mi, Ihm Sang Hyun, Pyun Wook Bum, Shin Jinho
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Identifying masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) and white-coat uncontrolled hypertension (WUCH) without ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring is challenging. Recent literature advocates intensive blood pressure (BP) control, but standard guidelines still suggest a clinic BP threshold of ≥ 149/90 mmHg to diagnose hypertension. This study explored the impact of different clinic BP targets on the prevalence and predictors of MUCH and WUCH.
METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 1,601 patients with hypertension from the Korean Ambulatory Blood Pressure registry, all with valid ABP records. Two clinic BP targets were evaluated: an intensive target (< 130/80 mmHg) and a conventional target (< 140/90 mmHg). Controlled hypertension was defined as a 24-hour mean ABP < 130/80 mmHg in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs who had a clinic BP below these targets.
RESULTS: The prevalence of MUCH decreased significantly with the intensive target (15.5%) versus the conventional target (45.8%). In contrast, the prevalence of WUCH increased only marginally with the intensive targets. Most patients with MUCH (75.9%) had a clinic BP between 130/80 mmHg and 139/89 mmHg when MUCH was classified using the conventional target. For predicting MUCH, factors such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, body mass index, left ventricular mass index (LVMI), and use of ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs were significant under the intensive target, whereas clinic BP, LVMI, alcohol intake, stroke history, and use of ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs were relevant under the conventional target.
CONCLUSION: Adopting the intensive clinic BP target (< 130/80 mmHg) notably reduced the prevalence of MUCH, with a slight increase in WUCH, offering a more accurate assessment of BP control than the conventional target.
METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 1,601 patients with hypertension from the Korean Ambulatory Blood Pressure registry, all with valid ABP records. Two clinic BP targets were evaluated: an intensive target (< 130/80 mmHg) and a conventional target (< 140/90 mmHg). Controlled hypertension was defined as a 24-hour mean ABP < 130/80 mmHg in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs who had a clinic BP below these targets.
RESULTS: The prevalence of MUCH decreased significantly with the intensive target (15.5%) versus the conventional target (45.8%). In contrast, the prevalence of WUCH increased only marginally with the intensive targets. Most patients with MUCH (75.9%) had a clinic BP between 130/80 mmHg and 139/89 mmHg when MUCH was classified using the conventional target. For predicting MUCH, factors such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, body mass index, left ventricular mass index (LVMI), and use of ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs were significant under the intensive target, whereas clinic BP, LVMI, alcohol intake, stroke history, and use of ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs were relevant under the conventional target.
CONCLUSION: Adopting the intensive clinic BP target (< 130/80 mmHg) notably reduced the prevalence of MUCH, with a slight increase in WUCH, offering a more accurate assessment of BP control than the conventional target.