Search

Background: Hypertension is a recognized strong risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, no data was available in our country to quantify the relationship between blood pressure and cardiovascular event., Objective: to quantify the risk of cardiovascular events according to blood pressure categories., Methods: A prospective epidemiological study was conducted in 1526 inhabitants from Rauch City, (Buenos Aires, Argentina) between 1997 and 2012. Subjects were classified into one of these blood-pressure categories: 1-optimal, 2-normal, 3-high-normal, 4-grade 1 hypertension, 5-grade 2 hypertension and 6-grade 3 hypertension. The first CVD event, including unstable angina pectoris, fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, myocardial revascularization, and fatal or non-fatal stroke, was defined as the primary endpoint. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to estimate the relative risk (HR) of CVD according to base-line blood-pressure categories., Results: In 2012, 1124 individuals (73.7% of the baseline sample), 719 women and 405 men (in 1997, aged 45±16 and 46±16 respectively) or their relatives in case of death, could be surveyed again in order to obtain information concerning incident CVD events. Cardiovascular event rates and HR values increased in a stepwise manner across the blood pressure categories (p for trend across categories <0.001 in both sex); however, in subjects aged ≥55 years a j-curve phenomenon was observed, showing the lowest incidence in the high-normal category. In all categories CVD events rates were higher for men., Conclusion: This study quantified relationships between BP and CVD starting from high-normal blood pressure in Argentina.

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.

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.

The aim of this study is to test the hypotheses that: 1) diagnosing the metabolic syndrome does not effectively identify insulin-resistant (IR) individuals; and 2) waist circumference (WC) is no better than body mass index (BMI) in predicting insulin resistance or the components of the metabolic syndrome (MetS). Measurements of BMI, WC, blood pressure, and fasting plasma glucose, insulin (FPI), triglycerides (TG), and HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) concentrations were made in 1,300 adults, without known cardiovascular disease (CVD) or drug treatment of hypertension or diabetes. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine the ability of the MetS, and its components, to identify IR individuals. In addition, comparisons were made of CVD risk factors following division of the population into quartiles of FPI concentrations, and univariate and multiple regression analysis used to compare the ability of WC, BMI, and FPI as predictors of MetS components. The MetS was no more effective in identifying IR individuals than several individual components (sensitivity~40%), and IR individuals not identified were at significantly increased CVD risk. FPI concentration was the best predictor of an abnormal glucose, TG, and HDL-C, whereas the adiposity indices were better predictors of abnormal blood pressure. The relationship between BMI and WC with the MetS and its components seemed comparable.