Comparison of three blood pressure measurement methods for the evaluation of two antihypertensive drugs: feasibility,agreement, and reproducibility of blood pressure response

Our objective was to compare three different methods of blood pressure measurement through the results of a controlled study aimed at comparing the antihypertensive effects of trandolapril and losartan. Two hundred and twenty-nine hypertensive patients were randomized in a double-blind parallel group study. After a 3-week placebo period, they received either 2 mg trandolapril or 50 mg losartan once daily for 6 weeks. At the end of both placebo and active treatment periods, three methods of blood pressure measurement were used: a) office blood pressure (three consecutive measurements); b) home self blood pressure measurements (SBPM), consisting of three consecutive measurements performed at home in the morning and in the evening for 7 consecutive days; and c) ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM), 24-h BP recordings with three measurements per hour.Of the 229 patients, 199 (87%) performed at least 12 valid SBPM measurements during both placebo and treatment periods, whereas only 160 (70%) performed good quality 24-h ABPM recordings during both periods (P < .0001). One hundred-forty patients performed the three methods of measurement well. At baseline and with treatment, agreement between office measurements and ABPM or SBPM was weak. Conversely, there was a good agreement between ABPM and SBPM. The mean difference (SBP/DBP) between ABPM and SBPM was 4.6 ± 10.4/3.5 ± 7.1 at baseline and 3.5 ± 10.0/4.0 ± 7.0 at the end of the treatment period. The correlation between SBPM and ABPM expressed by the r coefficient and the P values were the following: at baseline 0.79/0.70 (< 0.001/< .0001), with active treatment 0.74/0.69 (0.0001/.0001). Hourly and 24-h reproducibility of blood pressure response was quantified by the standard deviation of BP response. Compared with office blood pressure, both global and hourly SBPM responses exhibited a lower standard deviation. Hourly reproducibility of SBPM response (10.8 mm Hg/6.9 mm Hg) was lower than hourly reproducibility of ABPM response (15.6 mm Hg/11.9 mm Hg).In conclusion, SBPM was easier to perform than ABPM. There was a good agreement between these two methods whereas concordance between SBPM or ABPM and office measurements was weak. As hourly reproducibility of SBPM response is better than reproducibility of both hourly ABPM and office BP response, SBPM seems to be the most appropriate method for evaluating residual antihypertensive effect.     

Consensus Conference on Self-blood pressure measurement. Clinical applications and diagnosis

The present study was aimed at reviewing the medical literature devoted to the clinical applications of self-blood pressure monitoring (SBPM) and at providing some recommendations regarding the use of SBPM for diagnostic purposes. The lack of reliability of conventional blood pressure (BP) measurement is largely related to the extreme variability of BP over time. SBPM provides a large number of readings and can be used to predict the results of repeated clinical measurements. The use of SBPM in the diagnosis of white coat hypertension can be proposed as a screening test: if it gives a positive result (a low home BP), it should be confirmed by ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). SBPM could improve patients' compliance with medication. Last, SBPM may be cost-effective for the management of hypertensive patients, by reducing costs of medication, number of clinic visits and costs of cardiovascular morbidity. Compared with ABPM, SBPM seems to have a less value for the initial diagnosis of hypertension and for predicting prognosis. In contrast, it should be of more value for the long term follow-up of patients with white coat hypertension and for the evaluation of treatment efficacy in patients with sustained hypertension. The use of SBPM in diabetic hypertensives, in pregnant women and in the elderly is encouraged, but needs further evaluation.     

Is resistant hypertension really resistant?

BACKGROUND: Managing resistant hypertension is difficult and mostly involves expensive testing seeking an underlying secondary cause. This study was undertaken to determine 1) the extent of the white-coat phenomenon in patients with resistant hypertension, and 2) whether 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) or having BP recorded by a nurse instead of the referring doctor could clarify how many apparently resistant hypertensives actually have controlled BP. METHODS: This study involved 611 patients with BP > or = 140/90 mm Hg who were referred for 24-h ABPM by their specialist or general practitioner, including 277 patients who were taking no antihypertensives (group 1), 216 taking one or two antihypertensive drugs (group 2), and 118 taking at least three antihypertensives in combination (group 3). Each had BP recorded by one of two nurses before 24-h ABPM. Controlled BP was defined as awake ambulatory BP <135/85 mm Hg and the white-coat effect was the difference between the BP recorded by the referring doctor or nurse and the average awake ambulatory BP. RESULTS: Those with resistant hypertension (group 3) were older (61 years (12) v group 1: 46 years (14) and group 2: 56 (14) years; P < .001), but were of similar weight, height, and arm circumference to the other groups. Referral systolic, but not diastolic BP was higher in resistant hypertensives (mean 171/95 v 154/95 mm Hg and 164/94 mm Hg, respectively, P < .001 for systolic BP only). Twenty-eight percent of resistant hypertensives and 32% of those taking no antihypertensive drugs had normal awake ambulatory BP and the white-coat effect attributable to the referring doctor was always greater than that due to the nurse (range 16 to 26/12 to 14 mm Hg v 9 to 17/4 mm Hg, P < .001). Nurse recorded BP was highly sensitive (97%) in identifying awake hypertension but lacked specificity (57%) to replace ABPM. CONCLUSION: Our results show that approximately one in four patients with apparent resistant hypertension referred for ABPM have controlled BP and one-third of patients referred for initial evaluation of office or clinic hypertension have normal BP using ABPM, ie, white-coat hypertension. Twenty-four-hour ABPM appears an appropriate initial step before further investigating or treating patients with apparently resistant hypertension.     

Guidance on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: A statement from the HOPE Asia Network

Hypertension is an important public health issue due to its association with a number of serious diseases, including cardiovascular disease and stroke. The importance of evaluating hypertension taking into account different blood pressure (BP) profiles and BP variability (BPV) is increasingly being recognized, and is particularly relevant in Asian populations given the specific features of hypertension in the region (including greater salt sensitivity and a high rate of nocturnal hypertension). Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) is the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension and assessing 24‐hour BP and provides data on several important parameters that cannot be obtained using any other form of BP measurement. In addition, ABPM parameters provide better information on cardio‐ and cerebrovascular risk than office BP. ABPM should be used in all patients with elevated BP, particularly those with unstable office or home BP, or who are suspected to have white‐coat or masked hypertension. ABPM is also an important part of hypertension diagnosis and monitoring in high‐risk patients. ABPM needs to be performed using a validated device and good practice techniques, and has a role both in hypertension diagnosis and in monitoring the response to antihypertensive therapy to ensure strict BP control throughout the 24‐hour period. Use of ABPM in clinical practice may be limited by cost and accessibility, and practical education of physicians and patients is essential. The ABPM evidence and practice points in this document are based on the Hypertension Cardiovascular Outcome Prevention and Evidence (HOPE) Asia Network expert panel consensus recommendations for ABPM in Asia.     

The optimal scheme of self blood pressure measurement as determined from ambulatory blood pressure recordings

OBJECTIVE: To determine how many self-measurements of blood pressure (BP) should be taken at home in order to obtain a reliable estimate of a patient's BP. DESIGN: Participants performed self blood pressure measurement (SBPM) for 7 days (triplicate morning and evening readings). In all of them, office blood pressure (three consecutive readings) and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure were obtained as well. Average SBPM values, obtained from several combinations of readings, were correlated with the results of ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM). In addition, we assessed whether certain patient characteristics would influence such correlations. SETTING: Patients were recruited at hospital or general practice. PATIENTS: A total of 216 untreated hypertensive patients. RESULTS: The average SBPM value calculated from day 3 to day 7, omitting the first measurement of each morning and evening session, gave the best correlation with 24-h ABPM (r = 0.70). However, similar results were obtained from a SBPM value averaged from day 3 until 5 without the first measurement of each triplicate session. Overall, younger patients had significantly better correlations than older ones. Women had significantly better correlations with ABPM than men for systolic morning and daytime SBPM, whereas men had significantly better correlations for daytime and evening diastolic SBPM (P < 0.001). In addition, all correlations increased with lower systolic office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) values. CONCLUSIONS: A minimum number of 5 days of measurement is recommended to obtain a reliable estimate of a patient's usual BP. On each day, three consecutive morning and evening measurements should be performed. For calculating the average SBPM, the first 2 days and the first measurement of each triplicate measurements should be discarded. Moreover, patient characteristics may have an impact on the number of necessary self-measurements. However, because adhering to these recommendations will make SBPM a time-consuming procedure, this type of measurement should be performed only when a decision about starting or changing antihypertensive therapy is needed or in the case of special patient groups.     

Aldosterone excess and resistance to 24-h blood pressure control

BACKGROUND: Aldosterone excess has been reported to be a common cause of resistant hypertension. To what degree this represents true treatment resistance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to compare the 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) levels in resistant hypertensive patients with or without hyperaldosteronism. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-one patients with resistant hypertension were prospectively evaluated with an early-morning plasma renin activity (PRA), 24-h urinary aldosterone and sodium, and 24-h ABPM. Daytime, night-time, and 24-h blood pressure (BP) and nocturnal BP decline were determined. Hyperaldosteronism (H-Aldo) was defined as suppressed PRA (<1.0 ng/ml per h or <1.0 mug/l per h) and elevated 24-h urinary aldosterone excretion (>/= 12 mug/24-h or >/= 33.2 nmol/day) during ingestion of the patient's routine diet. RESULTS: In all patients, the mean office BP was 160.0 +/- 25.2/89.4 +/- 15.3 mmHg on an average of 4.2 medications. There was no difference in mean office BP between H-Aldo and normal aldosterone status (N-Aldo) patients. Daytime, night-time, and 24-h systolic and diastolic BP were significantly higher in H-Aldo compared to N-Aldo males. Daytime, night-time, and 24-h systolic BP were significantly higher in H-Aldo compared to N-Aldo females. Multivariate analysis indicated a significant interaction between age and aldosterone status such that the effects of aldosterone on ambulatory BP levels were more pronounced with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of similar office BP, ABPM levels were higher in resistant hypertensive patients with H-Aldo. These results suggest that high aldosterone levels impart increased cardiovascular risk not reflected by office BP measurements.     

Isolated ambulatory hypertension is common in outpatients referred to a hypertension centre

The present investigation was aimed at determining the prevalence and the blood pressure (BP) profile of isolated ambulatory hypertension, defined as an elevated ambulatory BP with normal office blood pressure, in a series of 1488 consecutive outpatients referred for routine clinical evaluation of suspected or established arterial hypertension. All patients underwent both office BP (OBP) measurement by a physician and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). Using OBP values (cutoff for diagnosis of hypertension >/=140/90 mmHg) and daytime ABPM (cutoff for diagnosis of hypertension >/=135/85 mmHg), patients were classified into eight subgroups. In the whole series we found that, independent of treatment status, the prevalence of isolated ambulatory hypertension exceeded 10%. More importantly, 45.3% of individuals who presented with normal OBP values, showed elevated BP at ABPM. Night-time BP, 24-h pulse pressure, and BP variability were significantly higher in isolated ambulatory hypertensives than in normotensive or in white-coat hypertensive individuals. Therefore, isolated ambulatory hypertension is characterized by a blood pressure profile that is similar to that observed in sustained hypertension. These findings suggest that isolated ambulatory hypertension is very common and probably the indications for ABPM should be more extensive in outpatients referred to hypertensive centre.     

Automated blood pressure measurement for diagnosing hypertension

Guidelines for the management of hypertension have started to include home blood pressure (BP) and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring as preferred methods for diagnosing hypertension. The next step will be to incorporate automated office BP measurement into the algorithm for diagnosing hypertension. Recent studies support this approach with automated office BP readings being closely correlated with the ambulatory BP.     

Prevalence of the white-coat effect at multiple visits before and during treatment

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and persistence of the white-coat effect (WCE) and white-coat hypertension (WCH) on multiple blood pressure measurement occasions in hypertensive patients with and without treatment. DESIGN: Essential hypertensive patients in whom we took office blood pressure measurements (OBPM) at eight visits (three readings per visit) performed self blood pressure measurements (SBPM) for 1 week prior to each visit (42 readings per week) over a period of 1 year. All measurements were performed with the same automatic device (Omron 705CP). In addition, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at the start and at the end of the study. At the start, patients did not use any medication but on subsequent visits they were treated on the basis of their SBPM values. WCH was defined as an OBPM-value > or = 140 and/or 90 mmHg and a SBPM or daytime ABPM value < 135/85 mmHg. This definition was used irrespective of treatment. We also determined the prevalence of a substantial WCE (OBPM 20 mmHg systolic or 10 mmHg diastolic higher than SBPM or daytime ABPM). SETTING: Patients were recruited at hospital or general practice. PATIENTS: A total of 163 mild-to-moderate essential hypertensive patients with a mean age of 56 years (56% males). RESULTS: At eight blood pressure (BP) measurement occasions, 75% of all patients had a substantial WCE at least once, while 57% had WCH at least once. One-third of the patients consistently had a substantial WCE and 14% consistently had WCH on three or more occasions The magnitude of the WCE was significantly related to the height of blood pressure in treated but not in untreated patients. CONCLUSION: In some patients, WCH or a substantial WCE occurs consistently on multiple OBPM visits. Especially in untreated patients, the magnitude of the WCE varies widely among individuals. These results support the incorporation of SBPM and/or ABPM into optimal management of hypertension, not only to prevent misdiagnosis in untreated patients but also to determine the need for adjusting antihypertensive therapy in treated subjects.     

Future developments in ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and self-blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice

A number of factors interact to promote the increased clinical use of both ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and self-blood pressure monitoring (SBPM). These include the phasing out of mercury, evidence of the unreliability of clinic measurements, technical advances in automated blood pressure measurement, increasing evidence that out-of-office measurements give the best risk assessment, and a gradual recognition by payers of the clinical utility of ABPM and SBPM. Both ABPM and SBPM have been endorsed by the two major guidelines for managing hypertensive patients (World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension and Joint National Committee VI). The use of SBPM has grown enormously over the past few years, mostly because of direct sales to patients. Although SBPM may give a better estimate of the true blood pressure than clinic readings, there are concerns about the accuracy of the monitors in individual patients. The main clinical indication for ABPM is the diagnosis of white-coat hypertension. This requires the demonstration that the blood pressure is normal outside the clinic, which can be established using SBPM and confirmed by ABPM. Even though ABPM may save drug costs in patients with white-coat hypertension, its use may also lead to increased drug expenditure in others in whom it demonstrates suboptimal blood pressure control. SBPM has the potential to reduce the number of clinic visits and also to improve blood pressure control. The ultimate validation of both procedures will be whether they can prevent cardiovascular morbidity. There have been suggestions that a non-dipping pattern of nocturnal blood pressure may carry a bad prognosis, but this may apply only to certain disease end-points. The greater recognition of the relevance of dipping status should provide an additional stimulus to the growth of both procedures. It is anticipated that, in the future, hypertension will be managed by the 'virtual hypertension clinic', using ABPM for the initial diagnosis, and SBPM with electronic linkage between the patient and the health-care provider for maintenance and follow-up.     

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring and Echocardiographic Findings in Renal Transplant Recipients

Hypertension is common in renal transplant recipients (RTRs). Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) is important in diagnosing hypertension and diurnal BP variation. The authors set out to compare office BP and ABPM measurements to determine diurnal pattern and to evaluate echocardiographic findings in RTRs. ABPM and office BP measurements were compared in 87 RTRs. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed for each patient. The correlations between office and 24‐hour ABPM were 0.275 for mean systolic BP (P=.011) and 0.260 for mean diastolic BP (P=.017). Only 36.8% had concordant hypertension between office BP and ABPM, with a masked hypertension rate of 16.1% and white‐coat effect rate of 24.1%. Circadian BP patterns showed a higher proportion of nondippers (67.8%). Left ventricular mass index was increased in 21.8% of all recipients. There was a significant but weak correlation between office BP and ABPM.     

The great myth of office blood pressure measurement

Clinical practice guidelines have traditionally recommended manual blood pressure (BP) measurement in the office setting as the standard method for diagnosing hypertension. In reality, manual BP in routine clinical practice is relatively inaccurate, over-diagnoses hypertension by provoking office-induced increases in BP and correlates poorly with both the awake ambulatory BP and target organ damage. The most recent guidelines recommend 24-h ambulatory BP and home BP for diagnosing hypertension. The advent of automated office BP (AOBP) represents a third alternative to conventional manual BP measurement, one that maintains the role of office BP readings in the diagnosis and management of hypertension. AOBP has three basic principles: multiple readings taken using a fully automated sphygmomanometer with the patient resting quietly alone. AOBP eliminates office-induced hypertension such that the cut-point for a normal AOBP is the same as for the awake ambulatory BP and home BP. As compared to routine manual office BP, AOBP provides more accurate BP readings, is more consistent during repeated office visits and in different settings and correlates better with both the awake ambulatory BP and target organ damage. The advantages of AOBP over manual BP measurement support its use in routine clinical practice.     

Blood pressure measurement and the guidelines: a proposed new algorithm for the diagnosis of hypertension

Current hypertension guidelines continue to base management decisions on the office BP as recorded by mercury sphygmomanometry. The imminent disappearance of mercury from the workplace for environmental and safety reasons provides an opportunity to re-assess how a diagnosis of hypertension is made. There are now several validated, automated BP recording devices available to replace mercury sphygmomanometers in the office setting. Self/home and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring should now become an integral part of the diagnostic algorithm for hypertension in view of their superior ability to predict clinical outcomes when compared to traditional office BP measurements.     

Role of blood pressure monitoring in non-pharmacological management of hypertension

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and home blood pressure (BP) measurement appear to be useful in the assessment of the effects of non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension because they can detect small changes in BP without observer bias. We studied the effects of various lifestyle modifications using ABPM and home BP measurement in Japanese patients with hypertension. Weight reduction by a hypocaloric diet (average 4 kg) was associated with decreases in 24-h BP (10/4 mmHg) as well as casual BP (9/6 mmHg). The reductions in daytime and night-time BPs were comparable. The effects of daily walking without weight loss on office, home, and 24-h BPs were 2-3/1-2 mmHg. The changes in home and 24-h BPs were more significant than those in office BP. A low-salt diet (25 mmol/day versus 250 mmol/day) decreased 24-h BP by 9/4 mmHg. This hypotensive effect was observed throughout the day. Potassium supplementation (64 mmol/day) decreased office, home and 24-h BPs by 3-4/1-2 mmHg. The changes in home and 24-h BPs were highly significant compared with office BP. Supplementation of magnesium (20 mmol/day) also reduced those BPs significantly. However, the effects of calcium supplementation (25 mmol/day) were small (1-2/1 mmHg) and were significant only for home BP. Alcohol restriction for 4 weeks decreased daytime BP by 3/2 mmHg but increased night-time BP by 4/2 mmHg. Average 24-h BP did not change. Smoking cessation lowered daytime BP without affecting night-time BP. Monitoring of 24-h BP and home BP can detect small changes in BP produced by lifestyle modifications. Ambulatory BP monitoring is particularly suitable in the assessment of changes in lifestyle affecting the circadian pattern of BP such as alcohol consumption and smoking.     

Is It Possible to Manage Hypertension and Evaluate Therapy Without Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring?

In the management of patients with hypertension, blood pressure (BP) has been traditionally measured in the physician's office. The contribution of ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to the management of hypertensive patients has been increasingly recognized through clinical and epidemiological research. Ambulatory BP monitoring can enhance the ability to detect white-coat or masked hypertension, determine the absence of nocturnal dipping status, and evaluate BP control in patients on antihypertensive therapy. Recently, the United Kingdom National Clinical Guideline Centre published guidelines for the clinical management of primary hypertension in adults, recommending the routine use of ABPM to make the initial diagnosis of hypertension. While the advantages of ABPM are apparent from a clinical perspective, its use should be considered in relation to the cost of the equipment, data evaluation, and staff training as well as the possible inconvenience to the patient. In this review, we summarize the clinical importance of ABPM and discuss the current guidelines for establishing the diagnosis of hypertension.     

Practical Aspects of Home and Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) monitoring is becoming increasingly important in the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Home BP and ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) are the two forms of monitoring BP in the out-of-office environment. Home BP monitoring is easy to perform, inexpensive, and engages patients in the care of their hypertension. Although ABPM is expensive and not widely available, it remains the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension. Observational studies show that both home BP and ABPM are stronger predictors of hypertension-related outcomes than office BP monitoring. There are no clinical trials showing their superiority over office BP monitoring in guiding the treatment of hypertension, but the consistency of observational data make a compelling case for their preferential use in clinical practice.     

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and type 2 diabetes mellitus

Hypertension is one of the main risk factors for the onset and progression of chronic complications in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) provides a better correlation with target organ lesions than BP obtained in the office. Furthermore, it allows the evaluation of distinct BP parameters such as the 24-h, daytime and nighttime systolic and diastolic BP means, BP loads and the absence of nocturnal drop of BP, as well as the identification of white-coat and masked hypertension. DM patients have higher daytime and nighttime BP means than non-DM patients. In addition, one third of normotensive type 2 DM patients have masked hypertension, which is associated with an increase in albuminuria and in left ventricle wall thickness. On the other hand, the prevalence and effect of white-coat hypertension in type 2 DM patients have not yet been properly evaluated. The absence of nocturnal drop of BP does not add information to the 24 h, daytime or nighttime BP measurements, but the nighttime BP means seem to be relevant in DM retinopathy. In conclusion, BP determination by ABPM allows better patient risk stratification for the development of DM chronic complications and is an essential instrument for effective BP control in these patients.     

Effects of hormone replacement therapy on office and ambulatory blood pressure in Japanese hypertensive postmenopausal women.

No study has demonstrated that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) affects blood pressure (BP) measured by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in Japanese postmenopausal women (PMW) with normotension or mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. In the present study, we examined the effects of HRT on office BP and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) in Japanese hypertensive or normotensive PMW. Thirty-one hypertensive (HT-HRT group) and 17 normotensive PMW (NT-HRT group) received HRT (0.625 mg of conjugated equine estrogen combined with 2.5 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate) orally for 12 months, and 30 hypertensive (HT-Control group) and 19 normotensive PMW (NT-Control group) did not receive HRT. In all of the hypertensive PMW, BP was controlled by a variety of antihypertensive drugs before starting HRT. The hypertensive PMW were divided into two groups according to the results of ABP before HRT: nondippers (those without a diurnal change in BP) and dippers (those with a diurnal change in BP). In all patients, office BP measurements and 24-h ABPM were performed before and 12 months after the start of HRT. HRT did not change either the office or the 24-h ambulatory systolic, diastolic, or mean BP in any of the groups. Therefore, HRT did not significantly alter the proportion of nondippers. We conclude that with respect to BP, HRT might not be harmful in hypertensive PMW whose BP has been well-controlled prior to the initiation of HRT, as well as in normotensive PMW.     

Pulse pressure or dipping pattern: which one is a better cardiovascular risk marker in resistant hypertension?

OBJECTIVE: Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) reduction and ambulatory pulse pressure (PP) are well known prognostic markers obtained from ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). The aim of this study is to investigate which one of these ABPM parameters is related to high cardiovascular risk profile in resistant hypertension, based on their associations with target organ damage (TOD). METHODS: Clinical-demographic, laboratory and ABPM variables were recorded in a cross-sectional study involving 907 resistant hypertensive patients. Nocturnal systolic BP reduction and 24-h PP were assessed both as continuous and dichotomized variables (PP at the upper tertile value: 63 mmHg). Statistical analyses included bivariate tests and multivariate logistic regression with each TOD as the dependent variable. RESULTS: Patients with the nondipping pattern and high 24-h PP shared some characteristics: they were older, had higher prevalence of cerebrovascular disease and nephropathy, higher office and 24-h BP levels, increased serum creatinine and microalbuminuria, and higher left ventricular mass index than their counterparts. Additionally, patients with high PP had a greater prevalence of diabetes and other TOD. In multivariate logistic regression, high PP was independently associated with all TODs even after adjustment for sex, age, BMI, cardiovascular risk factors, 24-h mean arterial pressure and antihypertensive treatment, whereas nondipping pattern was only associated with hypertensive nephropathy. Furthermore, PP was more strongly associated with the number of TOD than the nocturnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) fall. CONCLUSIONS: In a large group of resistant hypertensive patients, an increased 24-h PP shows a closer correlation with high cardiovascular risk profile than the nocturnal BP reduction.