Blunted sleep-time relative blood pressure decline increases cardiovascular risk independent of blood pressure level – the “normotensive non-dipper” paradox
Abstract
Numerous studies have consistently shown an association between blunted sleep-time relative blood pressure (BP) decline (non-dipping) and increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in hypertension. Normotensive persons with a non-dipper BP profile also have increased target organ damage, namely, increased left ventricular mass and relative wall thickness, reduced myocardial diastolic function, increased urinary albumin excretion, increased prevalence of diabetic retinopathy, and impaired glucose tolerance. It remains a point of contention, however, whether the non-dipper BP pattern or just elevated BP, alone, is the most important predictor of advanced target organ damage and future CVD events. Accordingly, we investigated the role of dipping status and ambulatory BP level as contributing factors for CVD morbidity and mortality in the MAPEC (Monitorización Ambulatoria para Predicción de Eventos Cardiovasculares, i.e., Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring for Prediction of Cardiovascular Events) study. We prospectively studied 3344 individuals (1718 men/1626 women), 52.6 ± 14.5 (mean ± SD) yrs of age, during a median follow-up of 5.6 yrs. BP was measured by ambulatory monitoring (ABPM) for 48 h at baseline, and again annually or more frequently (quarterly) if treatment adjustment was required in treated hypertensive patients. At baseline, those with ABPM-substantiated hypertension were randomized to one of two treatment-time regimen groups: (i) ingestion of all prescribed hypertension medications upon awakening or (ii) ingestion of the entire dose of ≥1 of them at bedtime. Those found to be normotensive at baseline were untreated but followed and evaluated by repeated ABPM like the hypertensive patients. Participants were divided into four investigated categories on the basis of dipping status and ambulatory BP: (i) dipper vs. non-dipper, and (ii) normal ambulatory BP if the awake systolic (SBP)/diastolic (DBP) BP means were <135/85 mm Hg and the asleep SBP/DBP means were <120/70 mm Hg, and elevated ambulatory BP otherwise. Cox survival analyses, adjusted for significant confounding variables, documented that non-dippers had significantly higher CVD risk than dippers, whether they had normal (p = .017) or elevated ambulatory BP (p < .001). Non-dippers with normal awake and asleep SBP and DBP means, who accounted for 21% of the studied population, had similar hazard ratio (HR) of CVD events (1.61 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.09-2.37]) as dippers with elevated ambulatory BP (HR: 1.54 [95% CI: 1.01-2.36]; p = .912 between groups). These results remained mainly unchanged for treated and untreated patients analyzed separately. Our findings document that the risk of CVD events is influenced not only by ambulatory BP elevation, but also by blunted nighttime BP decline, even within the normotensive range, thus supporting ABPM as a requirement for proper CVD risk assessment in the general population. The elevated CVD risk in "normotensive" individuals with a non-dipper BP profile represents a clear paradox, as those persons do not have "normal BP" or low CVD risk. Our findings also indicate the need to redefine the concepts of normotension/hypertension, so far established on the unique basis of BP level, mainly if not exclusively measured at the clinic, independently of circadian BP pattern.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Non-dipping in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular disease risk and has been associated with poor sleep.
“Non-dipping in BP is associated with CVD risk [63] and has been associated with poor sleep [64].”
From Association between sleep deficiency and cardiometabolic disease: implications for health disparities (2016) · cites this paper as [63]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 77 · Cited by 203
- Authors
- Hermida, R. C., Ayala, D. E., Mojón, A., & Fernández, J. R.
- Affiliations
- Universidade de Vigo (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Hermida, Ramón C.
- Venue
- Chronobiology International
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-10-05
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 87-98
- ISSN
- 0742-0528 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-6073
- OpenAlex
- W1988440117
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 10.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Chronobiology International (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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
- non-dipping blood pressure, cardiovascular risk, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, hypertension, target organ damage, left ventricular mass, cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, cardiovascular risk prediction, urinary albumin excretion, diabetic retinopathy, impaired glucose tolerance
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular Diseases, Circadian Rhythm, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardium, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Sleep, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Proportional Hazards Models, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory, Actigraphy
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