Cited by 104Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionSodium Intake and Health

Visit-to-Visit Office Blood Pressure Variability and Cardiovascular Outcomes in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial)

Open access
Chang, Tara I., Reboussin, David M., Chertow, Glenn M., Cheung, Alfred K., Cushman, William C., Kostis, William J., Parati, Gianfranco, Raj, Dominic +9 more·2017·Hypertension

Abstract

Studies of visit-to-visit office blood pressure (BP) variability (OBPV) as a predictor of cardiovascular events and death in high-risk patients treated to lower BP targets are lacking. We conducted a post hoc analysis of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a well-characterized cohort of participants randomized to intensive (<120 mm Hg) or standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic BP targets. We defined OBPV as the coefficient of variation of the systolic BP using measurements taken during the 3-,6-, 9-, and 12-month study visits. In our cohort of 7879 participants, older age, female sex, black race, current smoking, chronic kidney disease, and coronary disease were independent determinants of higher OBPV. Use of thiazide-type diuretics or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers was associated with lower OBPV whereas angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blocker use was associated with higher OBPV. There was no difference in OBPV in participants randomized to standard or intensive treatment groups. We found that OBPV had no significant associations with the composite end point of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events (n=324 primary end points; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.85–1.69, highest versus lowest quintile) nor with heart failure or stroke. The highest quintile of OBPV (versus lowest) was associated with all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.92; confidence interval, 1.22–3.03) although the association of OBPV overall with all-cause mortality was marginal ( P =0.07). Our results suggest that clinicians should continue to focus on office BP control rather than on OBPV unless definitive benefits of reducing OBPV are shown in prospective trials. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01206062

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.09788

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the SPRINT trial, all-cause mortality was independently associated with visit-to-visit systolic BP variability quantified using variability independent of the mean or maximum minus minimum BP levels, but not with systolic BP variability quantified using the coefficient of variation.

    “In an analysis of the SPRINT trial77,78, which enrolled patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, all-cause mortality was independently associated with visit-to-visit systolic BPV quantified using VIM or maximum minus minimum BP levels, but was not associated with systolic BPV quantified using the coefficient of variation.”

    From Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques (2022) · cites this paper as [77]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Calcium-channel blockers and diuretics reduce BP variability compared with other antihypertensive agents.

    “Other studies have also confirmed a beneficial effect of calcium-channel blockers and diuretics in reducing BPV compared with other antihypertensive agents77,91–94.”

    From Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques (2022) · cites this paper as [77]

    The Results (Correlates of OBPV) associate thiazide-type diuretics and dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers with lower visit-to-visit office BP variability. The Discussion also reports lower variability in comparator treatment groups from other trials, but says it is only possible that these drugs lower variability; the SPRINT associations do not establish the causal effect implied by “reduce.” (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chang, T. I., Reboussin, D. M., Chertow, G. M., Cheung, A. K., Cushman, W. C., Kostis, W. J., Parati, G., Raj, D., Riessen, E., Shapiro, B., Stergiou, G. S., Townsend, R. R., Tsioufis, K., Whelton, P. K., Whittle, J., Wright, J. T., & Papademetriou, V.
Affiliations
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • From the Division of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA (T.I.C., G.M.C.); Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (D.M.R.); Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of Utah and Renal Section, Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Health Care System (A.K.C.); Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, TN (W.C.C.); Division of Cardiovascular Disease and Hypertension, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (W.J.K.); Department of Medicine and...
Venue
Hypertension
Published
2017-10
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
751-758
ISSN
  • 0194-911X (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4563
OpenAlex
W2740027835
Cited by
104
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 2
FWCI
7.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000093, UL1TR000050, UL1TR000073, UL1TR001064, UL1TR000075, UL1TR000005, UL1TR000433, UL1TR000445, UL1TR002003, UL1TR000439)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P30GM103337)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23DK095914)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025755, UL1RR024134, UL1RR025752, UL1RR025771)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (9U54TR000017‐06)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
Keywords
systolic blood pressure, cardiovascular outcomes, intensive blood pressure control, SPRINT trial, all-cause mortality, heart failure, stroke, antihypertensive drugs, thiazide diuretics, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers
MeSH terms
Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Failure, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Office Visits, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient Care Planning, Risk Factors, United States, Risk Assessment, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review