The first study comparing a wearable watch‐type blood pressure monitor with a conventional ambulatory blood pressure monitor on in‐office and out‐of‐office settings

Wearable blood pressure (BP) monitoring devices which measure BP levels accurately both in and out of the office are valuable for hypertension management using digital technology. The authors have conducted the first comparison study of BPs measured by a recently developed wrist‐worn watch‐type oscillometric BP monitoring (WBPM) device, the “HeartGuide,” versus BPs measured by an ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) device, A&D TM‐2441, in the office (total of 4 readings alternately measured in the sitting position) and outside the office (30‐minutes interval measurements during daytime) in 50 consecutive patients (mean age 66.1 ± 10.8 years). The 2 BP monitoring devices were simultaneously worn on the same non‐dominant arm throughout the monitoring period. The mean difference (±SD) in systolic BPs (average of 2 readings) between WBPM and ABPM was 0.8 ± 12.8 mm Hg (P = .564) in the office and 3.2 ± 17.0 mm Hg (P < .001) outside the office. The proportion of differences that were within ±10 mm Hg was 58.7% in the office and 47.2% outside the office. In a mixed‐effects model analysis, the temporal trend in the difference between the out‐of‐office BPs measured by the two devices was not statistically significant. In conclusion, the difference between the WBPM and ABPM device was acceptable both in and out of the office.     

Comparison between oscillometric and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in ill preterm and full-term neonates

Conflicting data exist regarding the accuracy of the oscillometric method of blood pressure (BP) measurement in neonates. There is limited data regarding intra-arterial BP trends in neonates. We aimed to determine the accuracy of oscillometric BP measurements and to evaluate the BP distributions in ill neonates. A total of 1492 simultaneously obtained oscillometric and intra-arterial (umbilical arterial [UAC] or radial arterial) BP measurements were used for comparisons and 125,580 intra-arterial BP readings were used to the evaluate BP distribution. There was a statistically significant difference (P < .0001) between the oscillometric and radial mean arterial BP (MAP) 4.8 ± 9.8 mm Hg, systolic BP 8.3 ± 11.6 mm Hg, diastolic BP 4.3 ± 9.3 mm Hg and between the oscillometric and UAC systolic BP 5.2 ± 11.9 mm Hg and diastolic BP −0.8 ± 10.4 mm Hg. The MAP increased with increases in weight (35.3 ± 4.92 mm Hg/kg), post-menstrual age (−0.29 ± 1.41 mm Hg/week) and advanced gestational age at birth (13.12 ± 0.90 mm Hg/week). Oscillometric BP measurements are not equivalent to the intra-arterial (UAC or radial arterial) BP in ill neonates. The BP increases with increase in weight, gestational age at birth, and post-menstrual age in ill neonates.     

Antecedent rest may not be necessary for automated office blood pressure at lower treatment targets

In SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), use of the Omron 907XL blood pressure (BP) monitor set at 5 minutes of antecedent rest to record BP produced an automated office BP value 7/6 mm Hg lower than awake ambulatory BP at 27 months. The authors studied the impact on automated office BP of setting the Omron 907XL to 0 minutes instead of 5 minutes of rest in patients with readings in the lower normal BP range, similar to on‐treatment BP in the SPRINT intensive therapy group. Patients (n = 100) in cardiac rehabilitation were randomized to three BP readings at 1‐minute intervals using an Omron 907XL BP device set for 5 or 0 minutes of antecedent rest. Mean (±standard deviation) automated office BP (mm Hg) after 5 minutes of rest (120.2 ± 14.6/66.9 ± 8.6 mm Hg) was lower (P < .001/P < .01) than without rest (124.2 ± 16.4/67.9 ± 9.1 mm Hg). When target BP is in the lower normal range, automated office BP recorded without antecedent rest using an Omron 907XL device should be higher and closer to the awake ambulatory BP, compared with readings taken after 5 minutes of rest.     

Assessing the accuracy of the OMRON HEM‐907XL oscillometric blood pressure measurement device in patients with nondialytic chronic kidney disease

The OMRON HEM?907XL is a commercial oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitor that was used in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), in which 28% of participants had chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study examined the accuracy of the monitor in nondialytic patients with CKD. Eighty‐seven patients met inclusion criteria. The authors used a modified Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) protocol, with one observer recording measurements from the monitor and two blinded physicians obtaining simultaneous aneroid values by auscultation. Using AAMI method 1, there was a 2.5±9.5 mm Hg difference in OMRON and aneroid systolic BP, and a ?1.6±6.5 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. Using AAMI method 2, there was a 5.1±7.4 mm Hg difference in systolic BP and a ?0.2±5.4 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. In patients with CKD, the OMRON HEM‐907XL appears to be accurate for measuring diastolic BP, but did not perform as well for systolic BP.     

Simultaneous Compared With Sequential Blood Pressure Measurement Results in Smaller Inter‐Arm Blood Pressure Differences

There are currently few recommendations on how to assess inter‐arm blood pressure (BP) differences. The authors compared simultaneous with sequential measurement on mean BP, inter‐arm BP differences, and within‐visit reproducibility in 240 patients stratified according to age (<50 or ≥60 years) and BP (<140/90 mm Hg or ≥140/90 mm Hg). Three simultaneous and three sequential BP measurements were taken in each patient. Starting measurement type and starting arm for sequential measurements were randomized. Mean BP and inter‐arm BP differences of the first pair and reproducibility of inter‐arm BP differences of the first and second pair were compared between both methods. Mean systolic BP was 1.3±7.5 mm Hg lower during sequential compared with simultaneous measurement (P<.01). However, the first sequential measurement was on average higher than the second, suggesting an order effect. Absolute systolic inter‐arm BP differences were smaller on simultaneous (6.2±6.7/3.3±3.5 mm Hg) compared with sequential BP measurement (7.8±7.3/4.6±5.6 mm Hg, P<.01 for both). Within‐visit reproducibility was identical (both r=0.60). Simultaneous measurement of BP at both arms reduces order effects and results in smaller inter‐arm BP differences, thereby potentially reducing unnecessary referral and diagnostic procedures.     

A Comparison of Two Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitors Worn at the Same Time

There are limited data in the literature comparing two simultaneously worn ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) devices. The authors compared BPs from two monitors (Mobil‐O‐Graph [I.E.M., Stolberg, Germany] and Spacelabs 90207 [Spacelabs Medical, Issequah, WA]). In the nonrandomized component of the study, simultaneous 8‐hour BP and heart rate data were measured by Mobil‐O‐Graph, consistently applied to the nondominant arm, and Spacelabs to the dominant arm on 12 untreated adults. Simultaneous 8‐hour BP and heart data were obtained by the same monitors randomly assigned to a dominant or nondominant arm on 12 other untreated adults. Oscillometric BP profiles were obtained in the dominant and nondominant arms of the above 24 patients using an Accutorr (Datascope, Mahwah, NJ) device. The Spacelabs monitor recorded a 10.2‐mm Hg higher systolic pressure in the nonrandomized (P=.0016) and a 7.9‐mm Hg higher systolic pressure in the randomized studies (P=.00008) compared with the Mobil‐O‐Graph. The mean arterial pressures were 1 mm Hg to 2 mm Hg different between monitors in the two studies, and heart rates were nearly identical. Our observations, if confirmed in larger cohorts, support the concern that ABPM device manufacturers consider developing normative databases for their devices.     

A convenient method to verify the accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure monitors by the auscultatory method: A smartphone‐based app

It is recommended that oscillometric devices be calibrated by auscultation when first used, but this is difficult in practice. Here, we introduce a smartphone‐based technique to verify the accuracy of blood pressure monitors (BPMs). We enrolled 99 consecutive subjects and tested 6 brands of BPMs in this study. During measurements of electronic oscillometric BPMs, Korotkoff sounds were simultaneously collected using a stethoscope head beneath a cuff connected to a smartphone, and an app named Accutension Stetho could then yield an auscultatory BP reading as a reference. Next, differences in BP between the different BPMs and Accutension Stetho were determined. The percentage of BP differences falling within 5, 10, and 15 mm Hg; the mean (MD) value; and the standard deviation (SD) of BP differences and deflation errors were analyzed among all the BPMs. We found that the percentages of SBP differences falling within 5 mm Hg of the 6 BPMs were 80%, 79%, 77%, 72%, 68%, and 63%, in turn. The deflation rates among the 6 BPMs were 2.23, 3.48, 6.10, 2.44, 3.66, and 4.85 mm Hg/beat, respectively. Deflation errors, which were defined as deflation prior to the end of the Korotkoff sounds, existed in 4 BPMs. In conclusion, Accutension Stetho could detect BP differences between oscillometric BPM readings and simultaneous auscultatory readings. Diastolic BP was overestimated when the device deflated prior to the end of the Korotkoff sounds. Using the app, it is possible to evaluate the accuracy of BPMs among the same subjects.     

Daytime Systolic Ambulatory Blood Pressure With a Two‐Step Switch From Candesartan to Olmesartan Monotherapy and the Fixed‐Dose Combination of Olmesartan/Amlodipine in Patients With Uncontrolled Essential Hypertension (SEVICONTROL‐2)

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of the fixed‐dose combination olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg in patients with moderate essential hypertension not controlled on candesartan 32 mg. This was a prospective, single‐arm, phase IV study. The primary endpoint was the change in mean daytime systolic blood pressure (BP). A total of 77 of 89 screened patients started candesartan 32 mg, 62 olmesartan 40 mg, and 57 olmesartan 40 mg/amlodipine 10 mg. Mean daytime systolic BP was reduced by 9.8±15.2 mm Hg (P<.001) vs candesartan monotherapy. Office BP reduction was 9.2±18.8/5.0±8.9 mm Hg (P<0.001). Treatment goals (<140/90 mm Hg for office and <135/85 mm Hg for ambulatory BP) were achieved in 58.2% and 78.4% of patients, respectively. There was one drug‐related adverse event (edema) and no serious adverse events. Patients of Caucasian ethnicity with moderate essential hypertension uncontrolled on candesartan experienced a further drop in BP using olmesartan and amlodipine.     

Effect of cuff positioning on the accuracy of blood pressure measurement with automated electronic blood pressure monitors

It is recommended that the cuff should be wrapped around the upper arm with the midline of the bladder placed over the brachial artery during blood pressure (BP) measurement. However, in practice, the cuff of sphygmomanometers is often incorrectly placed. The authors aimed to assess the effect on the accuracy of BP measurement as to the placement of the cuff bladder by using oscillometric devices. Participants aged 18 years or older were enrolled. The center of the cuff bladder was placed directly over the brachial artery as the standard position (correct position), which was rotated by 90°medially (medial position), 90°laterally (lateral position), and rotated by 180°(contralateral position), respectively. The main outcomes were non‐invasive brachial BP in the four cuff positions, brachial artery pulse wave velocity, ankle‐brachial index, and invasive radial BP. Of 799 participants, 56.4% were men (60.37 ± 12.73 years), and of the 104 intensive care unit participants, 60.57% were men (57.78 ± 15.89 years). There were no significant differences in non‐invasive brachial BP among the four cuff positions (P > .1), and the mean BP differences between incorrect and standard cuff positions were within 1.0 mm Hg. BP of the incorrect positions was positively correlated with standard position (P < .001, r > .88) and showed good consistency. There was no effect on the accuracy of BP measurement as to the location of the midline of the cuff bladder by using oscillometric devices with a conventional cuff.     

The variability of ankle–arm blood pressure difference and ankle–brachial index in treated hypertensive patients

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether ankle–arm blood pressure (BP) difference (An–a) and ankle–brachial index (ABI) are consistent in treated hypertensive patients with obvious BP variation. This study enrolled 414 hypertensive patients (200 males; mean age, 61.3 ± 13.3 years) admitted to our hospital. BP of four limbs was simultaneously measured using four automatic BP measurement devices on the day of admission, and three and six day after admission. The An-a differences on systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), mean artery pressure (MAP), and pulse pressure (PP) in both sides were calculated, respectively. The relative decrease amplitude (RDA) of BP was calculated using the formula: RDA = (BP1 − BPn)/BP1. The ABI of the right side was calculated. From the first to the third measurement, arm SBP and DBP levels of both arms significantly decreased (right arm: SBP: 163.7 ± 18.4, 147.7 ± 15.3 vs. 135.4 ± 11.7 mm Hg; P < .05; DBP: 86.6 ± 13.4, 79.9 ± 11.6 vs. 74.5 ± 9.6 mm Hg; P < .05); at the same time, the ankle SBP (right ankle: 182.1 ± 22.1, 147.7 ± 15.3 vs. 153.4 ± 16.6 mm Hg; P < .05) and DBP (84.8 ± 13.4, 79.9 ± 11.6 vs. 75.8 ± 9.8 mm Hg; P < .05) of both sides also significantly decreased. The mean An–a of three measurements of both sides was consistent at the levels of about 20 mm Hg on SBP and PP, 7 mm Hg on MAP, and 0 mm Hg on DBP. However, sABI gradually increased from the first to the third measurement.In treated hypertensive patients, the An–a differences on SBP, DBP, PP, and MAP are generally consistent, but sABI is associated with underlying SBP levels.     

Home and clinic blood pressure responses in elderly individuals with systolic hypertension

Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring may enhance assessment of BP control. In this 16-week study, men and women 70 years or older with systolic BP between 150 and 200 mm Hg were randomized to receive valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide (V/HCTZ) 160/12.5 mg (n = 128), HCTZ 12.5 mg (n = 128), or V 160 mg (n = 128) for 4 weeks. Participants whose BP was 140/90 mm Hg or higher at weeks 4, 8, or 12 were uptitrated to a maximum of V/HCTZ 320/25 mg. Participants were evaluated by home BP monitoring using an automated device weekly before taking daily study medication (n = 301). Baseline BP ± SD for clinic (165.5 ± 11.8/85.1 ± 9.5 mm Hg) was approximately 3/1 mm Hg greater than home readings (162.5 ± 15.8/84.3 ± 10.2 mm Hg). Reductions in BP ± SEM at week 4 were similar for clinic (12.6 ± 1.0/4.7 ± 0.5 mm Hg) and home (10.9 ± 1.1/3.8 ± 0.5 mm Hg) readings (P = .25/P = .23; clinic versus home); differences between V/HCTZ and HCTZ or V were also similar for both home and clinic readings and results by either technique correlated significantly (P < .0001). Home BP measurements confirm that treatment initiated with V/HCTZ versus monotherapy resulted in greater antihypertensive efficacy. Home BP monitoring, if done with proper technique, provides a reliable indicator of BP control in elderly patients and may help guide drug dosing and titration.     

Automated office blood pressure measurements obtained with and without preceding rest are associated with awake ambulatory blood pressure

Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement, attended or unattended, eliminates the white coat effect (WCE) showing a strong association with awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP). This study examined the difference in AOBP readings, with and without 5 minutes of rest prior to three readings recorded at 1‐min intervals. Cross‐sectional data from 100 randomized selected hypertensives, 61 men and 39 women, with a mean age of 52.2 ± 10.8 years, 82% treated, were analyzed. The mean systolic AOBP values without preceding rest were 127.0 ± 18.2 mm Hg, and the mean systolic AOBP values with 5 minutes of preceding rest were 125.7 ± 17.9 mm Hg (P = .05). A significant order effect was observed for the mean systolic BP values when AOBP without 5 minutes of preceding rest was performed as the first measurement (130.0 ± 17.7 vs 126.5 ± 16.2, P = .008). When we used a target systolic AOBP ≥ 130 mm Hg, awake ABP yielded lower readings, while at a target systolic AOBP value of < 130 mm Hg higher awake ABP values were obtained. Our findings indicate that systolic AOBP can be initially checked without any preceding rest and if readings are normal can be accepted. Otherwise, when AOBP is ≥ 130 mm Hg, measurements should be rechecked with 5 minutes of rest.     

The optimal use of automated office blood pressure measurement in clinical practice

This evidence‐based article endorses the use of automated office blood pressure (AOBP). AOBP is the most favorable office blood pressure (BP) measuring technique as it provides accurate readings with 3‐15 mm Hg lower values than the casual conventional office measurements with auscultatory or semi‐automated oscillometric devices and relates closely to awake ABP readings. The AOBP technique seems to be superior to conventional office BP in predicting hypertension‐mediated organ damage and appears to be equally reliable to awake ABP in the prediction of cardiovascular (CV) disease. AOBP readings should be obtained either unattended, with the patient alone in the examination room, or attended with the presence of personnel in the room but with no talking to the patient, although this recommendation is not frequently followed in routine clinical practice. To optimize office BP readings, the type of device, the rest period before AOBP measurements (preceding rest), and the time intervals between measurements were evaluated. As AOBP readings have the advantage of removing many confounding factors, the authors propose to perform measurements with a preceding rest in all patients at the initial visit; if AOBP readings remain <130 mm Hg in subsequent visits, measurements could be accepted, otherwise, if are higher, patients should be evaluated by out‐of‐office BP measurements.     

A Hypertensive Response to Exercise Is Prominent in Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Hypertension: A Controlled Study

Blood pressure (BP) behavior during exercise is not clear in hypertensive patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The authors studied 57 men with newly diagnosed essential hypertension and untreated OSA (apnea‐hypopnea index [AHI] ≥5) but without daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≤10), and an equal number of hypertensive controls without OSA matched for age, body mass index, and office systolic BP. All patients underwent ambulatory BP measurements, transthoracic echocardiography, and exercise treadmill testing according to the Bruce protocol. A hypertensive response to exercise (HRE) was defined as peak systolic BP ≥210 mm Hg. Patients with OSA and control patients had similar ambulatory and resting BP, ejection fraction, and left ventricular mass. Peak systolic BP was significantly higher in patients with OSA (197.6±25.6 mm Hg vs 187.8±23.6 mm Hg; P=.03), while peak diastolic BP and heart rate did not differ between groups. Furthermore, an HRE was more prevalent in patients with OSA (44% vs 19%; P=.009). Multiple logistic regression revealed that an HRE is independently predicted by both the logAHI and minimum oxygen saturation during sleep (odds ratio, 3.94; confidence interval, 1.69–9.18; P=.001 and odds ratio, 0.94; confidence interval, 0.89–0.99; P=.02, respectively). Exaggerated BP response is more prevalent in nonsleepy hypertensives with OSA compared with their nonapneic counterparts. This finding may have distinct diagnostic and prognostic implications.     

Arterial Stiffness and Peripheral and Central Blood Pressure in Patients With Sickle Cell Disease

Blood pressure (BP) in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) has been reported to be lower than in persons in the general population. Data on arterial stiffness, which is an important risk factor for the progression of BP, are inconclusive for this patient population. Forty‐five adult patients with SCD and 40 controls matched for sex, age, and body mass index were studied. Brachial systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were significantly lower in the patient group (SBP 115.1±13.8 mm Hg vs 121.9±11.3 mm Hg and DBP 68.5±8.0 mm Hg vs 80.6±9.1 mm Hg, P<.05, respectively). Augmentation index (AIx), however, was significantly higher in SCD patients compared with healthy controls (24.9±9.6 for patients vs 12.4±10.8 for controls, P<.001), while carotid femoral pulse wave velocity was comparable between the two groups. The study shows that mechanisms other than arterial elasticity are involved in the low BP phenotype of patients with SCD.     

Effects of aliskiren-based therapy on ambulatory blood pressure profile, central hemodynamics, and arterial stiffness in nondiabetic mild to moderate hypertensive patients

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;00:000–000. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Aliskiren is a direct renin inhibitor that exerts its effect at the rate‐limiting step of the renin‐angiotensin system. This study was performed to examine the beneficial effects of aliskiren‐based antihypertensive therapy on the ambulatory blood pressure (BP) profile, central hemodybamics, and arterial stiffness in untreated Japanese patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Twenty‐one Japanese nondiabetic patients with untreated mild to moderate essential hypertension were initially given aliskiren once daily at 150 mg, and the dose was titrated up to 300 mg as needed. After 12 weeks of aliskiren‐based therapy, the clinic, ambulatory, and central BP values as well as brachial‐ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) were all significantly decreased compared with baseline (clinic systolic BP, 151±11 mm Hg vs 132±11 mm Hg; clinic diastolic BP, 91±13 mm Hg vs 82±9 mm Hg; 24‐hour systolic BP, 144±12 mm Hg vs 133±11 mm Hg; 24‐hour diastolic BP, 88±8 mm Hg vs 81±9 mm Hg; central BP, 162±16 mm Hg vs 148±14 mm Hg; baPWV, 1625±245 cm/s vs 1495±199 cm/s; P<.05). These results show that aliskiren, as a first‐line regimen, improves the ambulatory BP profile and may have protective vascular effects in Japanese nondiabetic patients with untreated mild to moderate essential hypertension.     

Reliability of Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitoring in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Admitted for Electric Cardioversion

The reliability of automated oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitors in atrial fibrillation (AF) has been poorly investigated, only comparing different patients with AF and sinus rhythm (SR), and is a method influenced by individual characteristics. This study compared the reliability of the oscillometric device A&D TM‐2430 (A&D Company, Tokyo, Japan) with that of a mercury sphygmomanometer in AF patients whose SR was restored after electric cardioversion (ECV). Three consecutive BP measurements were obtained on the day before and about 30 days after ECV in stable treatment conditions. Of the 100 patients studied, 63 reported an SR at follow‐up, with a significant increase in systolic BP and a significant decrease in diastolic BP according to both devices. There were no significant differences between the systolic and diastolic biases before and after ECV using Bland Altman analysis (P > .05 each). The oscillometric device analyzed, using three repeated measurements, is reliable in measuring BP in AF patients.     

Acute Effects of an Oral Nitric Oxide Supplement on Blood Pressure,Endothelial Function,and Vascular Compliance in Hypertensive Patients

This blinded placebo‐controlled crossover study evaluated the acute effects of an orally disintegrating lozenge that generates nitric oxide (NO) in the oral cavity on blood pressure (BP) response, endothelial function, and vascular compliance in unmedicated hypertensive patients. Thirty patients with clinical hypertension were recruited and enrolled in a blinded placebo‐controlled clinical trial in an outpatient setting. Average baseline BP in 30 patients was 144±3/91±1 mm Hg. NO supplementation resulted in a significant decrease of 4 mm Hg in resting systolic BP (P<.003) and a significant decrease of 5 mm Hg in diastolic BP (P<.002) from baseline and placebo after 20 minutes. In addition, there was a further statistically significant reduction by 6 mm Hg in both systolic and diastolic pressure after 60 minutes (P<.0001 vs baseline). After a half hour of a single dose, there was a significant improvement in vascular compliance as measured by augmentation index and, after 4 hours, a statistically significant improvement in endothelial function as measured by the EndoPAT (Itamar Medical, Franklin, MA). A single administration of an oral active NO supplement appears to acutely lower BP, improve vascular compliance, and restore endothelial function in patients with hypertension.     

Add‐On Use of Eplerenone Is Effective for Lowering Home and Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Drug‐Resistant Hypertension

The authors aimed to investigate the blood pressure (BP)–lowering ability of eplerenone in drug‐resistant hypertensive patients. A total of 57 drug‐resistant hypertensive patients whose home BP was ≥135/85 mm Hg were investigated. The patients were randomized to either an eplerenone group or a control group and followed for 12 weeks. The efficacy was evaluated by clinic, home, and ambulatory BP monitoring. Urinary albumin, pulse wave velocity, and flow‐mediated vasodilation (FMD) were also evaluated. Home morning systolic BP (148±15 vs 140±15 mm Hg) and evening systolic BP (137±16 vs 130±16 mm Hg) were significantly lowered in the eplerenone group (n=35) compared with baseline (both P<.05), while unchanged in the control group (n=22). BP reductions in the eplerenone group were most pronounced for ambulatory awake systolic BP (P=.04), awake diastolic BP (P=.004), and 24‐hour diastolic BP (P=.02). FMD was significantly improved in the eplerenone group. In patients with drug‐resistant hypertension, add‐on use of eplerenone was effective in lowering BP, especially home and ambulatory awake BP.     

Comparison of two noninvasive devices for measurement of central systolic blood pressure with invasive measurement during cardiac catheterization

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012; 14:575–579. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Recently, a new device for noninvasive assessment of central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) (BPro device with A‐Pulse) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, but available data are limited. In 52 patients undergoing invasive elective cardiac evaluation, central hemodynamics were measured invasively. Immediately thereafter, radial artery waveforms were sampled by two noninvasive techniques, the BPro and, as a comparator, the SphygmoCor System. Then, central hemodynamics were measured invasively for a second time. The invasively recorded cSBP (137±27 mm Hg) did not differ with both noninvasively assessed cSBP by BPro (136±21 mm Hg, P=.627 vs invasive cSBP) and by SphygmoCor (136 ± 23 mm Hg, P=.694 vs invasive cSBP) and correlated highly between invasively recorded and both noninvasively assessed cSBP. However, using Bland‐Altman plots, spreading of compared data of both devices can be found (BPro: 0.87±13 mm Hg vs invasive cSBP; SphygmoCor: 0.77±14 mm Hg vs invasive cSBP). There was an excellent correlation of both noninvasive devices for the calculation of cSBP (r=0.961, P<.001). cSBP differed by only 0.1±6 mm Hg (P=.913) between the two noninvasive devices. Therefore, both noninvasive devices showed an accurate agreement in cSBP compared with invasively measured cSBP.