ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2015
Association Between Visit-to-Visit Variability in Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Events in Hypertensive Patients After Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visit-to-visit Systolic Blood Pressure Variability and Stroke Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Current medical science · 2019Pooled it
- Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure and cardiovascular events among the working-age population in Japan: findings from the Japan Epidemiology Collaboration on Occupational Health Study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2021Article
- Visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction predicts long-term cardiovascular outcomes.Journal of human hypertension · 2019Article
- Short-term blood pressure variability in acute coronary syndrome.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisit-to-visit variability (VVV) in blood pressure (BP) in addition to high BP has been shown to be a strong predictor of coronary events and stroke. Therefore, we investigated the associations between VVV in BP or BP levels and cardiovascular events after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
methodsWe enrolled 176 hypertensive patients who had undergone successful PCI and who had four clinic visits to measure BP until follow-up coronary angiography (CAG) at 6 - 9 months after PCI. The patients were divided into those with acute coronary syndrome (ACS group; n = 50) and those with stable angina pectoris (SAP group; n = 126). We determined VVV in BP expressed as the standard deviation (SD) of average BP, average, and the maximum and minimum BP during the follow-up period. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and all-cause death) were also analyzed.
resultsThere were no significant differences in VVV in BP, average BP or maximum or minimum BP between the patients with and without MACE in all patients, the ACS and SAP groups. Interestingly, in the ACS group, VVV in SBP and maximum SBP in patients with MI were significantly higher than those in patients without MI. The cut-off levels for VVV in BP and maximum SBP that gave the greatest sensitivity and specificity for MI in the ACS group were 15.1 and 138 mm Hg, respectively.
conclusionHigher VVV in SBP and maximum SBP in patients with ACS after successful PCI were associated with the onset of MI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.