Distinct associations of blood pressure phenotypes with subclinical cerebrovascular disease and coronary artery calcification in Japanese men

Le résumé fourni par la source

Hypertension, encompassing white-coat hypertension (WCH), masked hypertension (MH), and sustained hypertension (SH), is an established risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), including atherosclerosis. However, among the general population, findings on which target organ is affected by the different phenotypes of hypertension remain unclear. In this community-based observational study of Shiga Epidemiological Study of Subclinical Atherosclerosis, 740 Japanese men underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging to assess the presence of lacunar infarction, white-matter hyperintensities, microbleeds, and intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS) between 2012 and 2015. They also underwent office blood pressure (BP) measurements, home BP monitoring for at least five consecutive days, and coronary artery calcification (CAC) assessments between 2010 and 2014. The final analysis included 686 participants without a history of CVDs. Of the 686 participants, the mean age ( ± SD) was 68.0 ( ± 8.3) years, and 39.3% were taking antihypertensive medication. In multivariable-adjusted models, each of WCH, MH, and SH was significantly associated with a higher risk of microbleeds compared to normotension. However, the association of WCH with microbleeds was evident only among those on antihypertensive medication (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 6.75 [95% CI 1.83-24.86]) and absent in those not on such medication (adjusted OR 1.20 [95% CI 0.31-4.73]). SH was associated with lacunar infarction, ICAS, and CAC. Among Japanese men, WCH, MH, SH were associated with subclinical cerebrovascular diseases, whereas only SH was associated with CAC. Moreover, any elevated BP phenotype increased the risk of microbleeds. Our findings suggest that different hypertension phenotypes distinctly affect target organs, particularly the brain and heart.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.