Uncontrolled and masked uncontrolled blood pressure in treated pregnant women with chronic hypertension and risk for preeclampsia/eclampsia

To analyze the relationship between the level of BP achieved with treatment and the risk for development of preeclampsia/eclampsia (PE), we conducted a historical cohort study on 149 consecutive pregnant women with treated chronic hypertension, evaluated between January 1, 2016, and November 31, 2022. According to office BP readings and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) performed after 20 weeks of gestation, the cohort was classified in controlled hypertension, white-coat uncontrolled hypertension, masked uncontrolled hypertension and sustained hypertension. Risks for the development of PE were estimated using logistic regression. One hundred and twenty-four pregnant women with a control BP evaluation were included in this analysis. The rates of PE were 19.4%, 27.3%, 44.8% and 47.1% for controlled, white-coat uncontrolled, masked uncontrolled and sustained uncontrolled hypertension, respectively. Compared with women with controlled hypertension, the relative risk for PE increased markedly in women with sustained uncontrolled (OR 3.69, 95% CI, 1.19-11.45) and masked uncontrolled (OR 3.38, 95% CI, 1.30-11.45) hypertension, but not in those with white-coat uncontrolled (OR 1.56 95% CI, 0.36-6.70); adjustment for covariates did not modify the results. Each mmHg higher of systolic and diastolic daytime ABPM increased the relative risk for PE ~4% and ~5%, respectively. Each mmHg higher of systolic and diastolic nocturnal BP increased the risk ~5% and ~6%, respectively. When these risks were adjusted for ABPM values in opposite periods of the day, only nocturnal ABPM remained as a significant predictor. In conclusion, masked uncontrolled hypertension implies a substantial risk for the development of PE, comparable to those of sustained uncontrolled. The presence of nocturnal hypertension seems important.

Hypertension arising after 20 weeks of gestation: gestational hypertension or masked chronic hypertension?

The objectives of this study were 1-to evaluate the prevalence of masked chronic hypertension in pregnant women classified as gestational hypertension 2-to compare the risks of developing preeclampsia in true gestational hypertension vs those women classified as having gestational hypertension but who had had masked hypertension in the first half of pregnancy. We conducted a cohort study in consecutive high-risk pregnancies who were evaluated before 20 weeks of gestation. Women who developed gestational hypertension (normotension in the office before 20 weeks of gestation and office BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg and/or antihypertensive treatment in the second half of gestation) were divided, according to an ABPM performed before 20 weeks of pregnancy, in two subgroups: subgroup 1-if their ABPM was normal, and subgroup 2-if they had masked chronic hypertension. Risks for preeclampsia (PE) were estimated and compared with normotensive women. Before 20 weeks of gestation, 227 women were evaluated (age 32 ± 6 years, median gestation age 15 weeks); 67 had chronic hypertension (29.5%). Of the remaining 160, 39 developed gestational hypertension (16 in subgroup 1 and 23 insubgroup 2. Compared with normotensive pregnant women, subgroup 1 of women with gestational hypertension did not increase the risk of developing PE (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.16-6.65). Conversely, subgroup 2 of gestational hypertension increased the risk of PE more than 4 times (0R = 4.47 CI = 1.16-12.63). Risk estimation did not change substantially after the adjustment for multiple possible confounders. In conclusion, the59% of women initially diagnosed as gestational hypertensive according to current recommendations had masked chronic hypertension and a very high risk of developing PE.

Masked hypertension and neonatal outcome in high-risk pregnancies

We previously showed that masked hypertension is a frequent finding in high-risk pregnancies and a strong predictor of preeclampsia/eclampsia. However, neonatal consequences of masked hypertension have not been deeply analyzed. Consequently, the aim of this study was to determine if masked hypertension is a risk factor for poor neonatal outcome. We evaluated a cohort of 588 high-risk pregnant women (29 ± 7 years old with 27 ± 6 weeks of gestation at blood pressure evaluation); 22.1%, 8.5%, 2.9%, and 2.6% had history of hypertension, diabetes, collagen diseases and chronic renal disease, respectively. According to the data of office and ambulatory blood pressures monitoring, women was classified as normotension (61.7%), white-coat hypertension (5.4%), masked hypertension (21.6%) and sustained hypertension (11.2%) respectively. Compared to normotension, all neonatal outcomes were worst in women with masked hypertension; neonates had lower mean birth weight (2577 (842) vs. 3079 (688) g, P < 0.001), higher prevalence of very low (12.1% vs 2.0%, P = .002) and extremely low birth weight (4.3% vs 0%, P < 0.001), and low one-minute APGAR score (7.8% vs 1.8%, P < 0.001). Furthermore, 14.2% needed admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICE) (P = 0.001). Compared with normotension the risk for poor the combined neonatal outcome (admission to NICE plus still born) was significantly higher in masked hypertension (adjusted OR 2.58 95% CI 1.23-5.40) but not in white-coat hypertension (adjusted OR 0.41 95% CI 0.05-3.12). In conclusion, in high-risk pregnancies, masked hypertension was a strong and independent predictor for poor neonatal outcomes.

Nocturnal hypertension and risk of developing early-onset preeclampsia in high-risk pregnancies

To test the hypothesis that nocturnal hypertension identifies risk for early-onset preeclampsia/eclampsia (PE), we conducted an historical cohort study of consecutive high-risk pregnancies between 1st January 2016 and 31st March 2020. Office blood pressure (BP) measurements and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) were performed. The cohort was divided into patients without PE or with early- or late-onset PE (<34 and ≥34 weeks of gestation, respectively). The relative risks of office and ABPM hypertension for the development of late- or early-onset PE were estimated with multinomial logistic regression using no PE as a reference category. Four hundred and seventy-seven women (mean age 30 ± 7 years, with 23 ± 7 weeks of gestation at the time of the BP measurements) were analyzed; 113 (23.7%) developed PE, 69 (14.5%) developed late-onset PE, 44 (9.2%) developed early-onset PE. Office and ambulatory BP increased between the groups, and women who developed early-onset PE had significantly higher office and ambulatory BP values than those with late-onset PE or without PE. Hypertension prevalence increased across groups, with the highest values in early-onset PE. Nocturnal hypertension was the most prevalent finding and was highly prevalent in women who developed early-onset PE (88.6%); only 1.6% of women without nocturnal hypertension developed early-onset PE. Additionally, nocturnal hypertension was a stronger predictor for early-onset PE than for late-onset PE (adjusted OR, 5.26 95%CI 1.67-16.60) vs. 2.06, 95%CI 1.26-4.55, respectively). In conclusion, nocturnal hypertension was the most frequent BP abnormality and a significant predictor of early-onset PE in high-risk pregnancies.

Evaluation of ventricular-arterial coupling by impedance cardiography in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

The interplay between cardiac function and the arterial system is currently defined as ventricular-arterial coupling (VAC) and it is an expression of global cardiovascular efficiency. VAC involves a variety of complex interactions between the heart and the vasculature. A basic index of VAC is the ratio of effective arterial elastance (Ea)/ end-systolic elastance (Ees). While this is often done with echocardiography, obtaining Ea/Ees using impedance cardiography is feasible, although this possibility has not been explored so far.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the Ea/Ees values obtained using echocardiography and impedance cardiography.

APPROACH

Two independent operators estimated Ea/Ees in 91 (41  ±  14 years old, women 51%) untreated apparently healthy individuals using (1) Doppler echocardiography with the single-beat method developed by Chen et al (2001 J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 38 2028-34); and (2) data provided by impedance cardiography. The differences between Ea/Ees values were compared and correlation between both methods was estimated.

MAIN RESULTS

Although Ea and Ees values calculated by impedance cardiography were lower than those estimated by echocardiography (-0.201  ±  0.457 mmHg ml^-1 and  -0.193  ±  0.413 mmHg ml^-1), Ea/Ees ratio values were similar. Thus, there was no significant difference between the mean values of Ea/Ees estimated by impedance cardiography or echocardiography (Ea/Ees impedance cardiography  -  Ea/Ees echocardiography  =  -0.015  ±  0.096, p   =  0.150). Ea/Ees values calculated by both methods were highly correlated (r  =  0.85, p   <  0.001), as well as the pre-ejection and left ventricular ejection time (r  =  0.83 and r  =  0.91, respectively).

SIGNIFICANCE

In healthy individuals, estimation of Ea/Ees by impedance cardiography yielded similar values to those obtained using echocardiography.

Nocturnal but not Diurnal Hypertension Is Associated to Insulin Resistance Markers in Subjects With Normal or Mildly Elevated Office Blood Pressure

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the relationships among insulin resistance markers and nocturnal and diurnal hypertension in normotensive or mildly untreated hypertensive adults.

METHODS

The study was performed in both female and male adults referred to the Cardiometabolic Unit of the Hospital San Martín, La Plata, Argentina, in order to perform an ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) for the evaluation of a possible hypertensive disorder. The population was stratified according to their ABPM in: 1-presence or absence of diurnal hypertension and 2-presence or absence of nocturnal hypertension; both conditions were analyzed separately. Fasting plasma insulin (FPI), homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), and triglycerides (TG)/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio were used as surrogate markers of insulin resistance and compared among subjects with vs. without diurnal or nocturnal hypertension.

RESULTS

One hundred and five patients, 55 women, 47 (11) years old, and 50 men, 44 (16) years old, were included. Diurnal and nocturnal hypertension were found in 60% and 64% of the sample, respectively. There were no significant differences among the levels of insulin resistance markers between individuals with or without diurnal hypertension. In contrast, individuals with nocturnal hypertension were more insulin resistant irrespectively of whether they were evaluated using FPI (P = 0.016), HOMA-IR (P = 0.019), or TG/HDL-C ratio (P = 0.011); FPI differences remained significant after adjustment for sex, age, and obesity indicators (P = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Nocturnal but not diurnal hypertension was related to higher levels of 3 insulin resistance markers in normotensive and untreated mildly hypertensive adults; this relationship seems partially independent of obesity.

Insulin resistance: The linchpin between prediabetes and cardiovascular disease

The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that cardiovascular disease occurs to the greatest extent in persons with prediabetes mellitus who are also insulin resistant. In 2003, 664 non-diabetic women (n = 457) and men (n = 207), aged 52 ± 16 and 53 ± 15 years, were surveyed during a programme for cardiovascular disease prevention. Fasting plasma glucose concentrations defined participants as having normal fasting plasma glucose (fasting plasma glucose <5.6 mmol/L) or prediabetes mellitus (fasting plasma glucose ⩾ 5.6 and <7.0 mmol/L). The tertile of prediabetes mellitus subjects with the highest fasting plasma insulin concentration was classified as insulin resistant. Baseline cardiovascular disease risk factors were accentuated in prediabetes mellitus versus normal fasting glucose, particularly in prediabetes mellitus/insulin resistant. In 2012, 86% of the sample were surveyed again, and the crude incidence for cardiovascular disease was higher in subjects with prediabetes mellitus versus normal fasting glucose (13.7 vs 6.0/100 persons/10 years; age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio = 1.88, p = 0.052). In prediabetes mellitus, the crude incidences were 22.9 versus 9.6/100 persons/10 years in insulin resistant versus non-insulin resistant persons (age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio = 2.36, p = 0.040). In conclusion, cardiovascular disease risk was accentuated in prediabetes mellitus/insulin resistant individuals, with a relative risk approximately twice as high compared to prediabetes mellitus/non-insulin resistant subjects.

Should the first blood pressure reading be discarded?

We evaluated the consequences of excluding the first of three blood pressure (BP) readings in different settings: a random population sample (POS, n=1525), a general practice office (GPO, n=942) and a specialized hypertension center (SHC, n=462). Differences between systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) estimates obtained including and excluding the first reading were compared and their correlation with ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) was estimated. The samples were divided into quartiles according to the difference between the third and the first SBP (3-1ΔSBP). SBP decreased through sequential readings, 3-1ΔSBP was -5.5 ± 9.7 mm Hg (P<0.001), -5.1 ± 10.4 mm Hg (P<0.001) and -6.1 ± 9.3 mm Hg (P<0.001) for POS, GPO and SHC, respectively. However, individuals included in the top quartile of 3-1ΔSBP showed their highest values on the third reading. The mean SBP estimate was significantly higher excluding the first reading (P<0.001), but the differences among both approaches were small (1.5-1.6 mm g). Moreover, the correlation between SBP values including and excluding the first reading and daytime ABPM were comparable (r = 0.69 and 0.68, respectively). Similar results were observed for DBP. In conclusion, our study does not support the notion of discarding the first BP measurement and suggests that it should be measured repeatedly, regardless the first value.

Comparison of the abilities of the plasma triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio and the metabolic syndrome to identify insulin resistance

This study compares the ability of an elevated triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TG/HDL-C) ratio, using sex-specific cut-points, to identify insulin-resistant individuals within a population without known cardiac disease or diabetes with that obtained using the diagnostic criteria of the metabolic syndrome (MetS). Measurements were made of waist circumference (WC), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin (FPI), plasma TG and plasma HDL-C concentrations in 1102 women and 464 men. These data were used to classify subjects as being insulin resistant (FPI concentration in the upper quartile) and having the MetS or an elevated TG/HDL-C ratio (>2.5 and >3.5 for women and men, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity with which the two indices identified insulin-resistant subjects were similar (43% and 81% for TG/HDL-C ratio and 45% and 82% for MetS), as the number of individuals was found with either an elevated TG/HDL-C ratio (n = 386) or the MetS (n = 384). Eighty-one per cent of the individuals were identified concordantly. Cardio-metabolic risk profiles in 'low-risk' individuals identified by a low TG/HDL-C ratio were comparable to those who did not have the MetS, and this was also the case when comparing 'high-risk' groups identified by having the MetS or an elevated TG/HDL-C ratio. These findings suggest that TG/HDL-C concentration ratio is as adequate as MetS diagnosis to identify insulin-resistant subjects.

Relation among the plasma triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration ratio, insulin resistance, and associated cardio-metabolic risk factors in men and women

Results of recent studies using the ratio of plasma triglyceride (TG) to high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol concentration to identify insulin-resistant patients at increased cardiometabolic risk have emphasized that the cut point used for this purpose will vary with race. Because TG and HDL cholesterol concentrations vary with gender, this analysis was initiated to define gender-specific plasma TG/HDL cholesterol concentration ratios that best identified high-risk subjects among women (n = 1,102) and men (n = 464) of primarily European ancestry. Insulin resistance was defined as the 25% of the population with the highest values for fasting plasma insulin concentration and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance. Using TG/HDL concentration ratios >2.5 in women and >3.5 in men identified subgroups of men and women that were comparable in terms of insulin resistance and associated cardiometabolic risk, with significantly higher values for fasting plasma insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, blood pressure, body mass index, waist circumference, and glucose and TG concentrations and lower HDL cholesterol concentrations than in women and men below these cut points. The sensitivity and specificity of these gender-specific cut points to identify insulin-resistant subjects were about 40% and about 80%, respectively. In conclusion, the plasma TG/HDL cholesterol concentration ratio that identifies patients who are insulin resistant and at significantly greater cardiometabolic risk varies between men and women.