SynthesisHypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979)2022
Risk Stratification by Cross-Classification of Central and Brachial Systolic Blood Pressure.
Synthesis in Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association of cardiovascular events with central systolic blood pressure: A systemic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2024Pooled it
- Central Blood Pressure and Augmentation Index in Older Adults With Intellectual Disabilities.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025Article
- [Research progress in central aortic pressure estimation algorithms].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025Review
- Stronger Association Between Blood Pressure and Arterial Stiffness in Older Women than Men: The Hordaland Health Study.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Arterial Stiffness, Central Blood Pressure, and the Risk of Incident Stroke in Hypertensive Adults.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Personalised hypertension management with accurate blood pressure measurement: much achieved, much more to do.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- 24-hour isolated aortic systolic hypertension phenotype and its association with carotid and cardiac damage: the SAFAR study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Independent and joint effect of central and brachial SBP on incident stroke in hypertensive adults.Journal of hypertension · 2025Article
- Chinese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension (2024 revision).Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2025Article
- Beyond the beats: exploring the link between blood pressure fluctuations with anxiety, depression, and sleep.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Association of Total Mortality and Cardiovascular Endpoints With the Timing of the First and Second Systolic Peak of the Aortic Pulse Wave.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Another step forward in the introduction of aortic systolic blood pressure assessment into clinical practice?Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Article
- Rationale for the Inclusion of β-Blockers Among Major Antihypertensive Drugs in the 2023 European Society of Hypertension Guidelines.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2024Article
- Vascular phenotypes in early hypertension.Journal of human hypertension · 2023Article
- Vascular ageing: moving from bench towards bedside.European journal of preventive cardiology · 2023Article
- Hypertension in China: epidemiology and treatment initiatives.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2023Review
- Brachial and central hypertension in relation to coronary stenosis in patients with coronary angiography.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2023Article
- 130/80 mmHg as a unifying hypertension threshold for office brachial, office central, and ambulatory daytime brachial blood pressure.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2023Article
- Commentary: Direct estimation of central aortic pressure from measured or quantified mean and diastolic brachial blood pressure: agreement with invasive records.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhether cardiovascular risk is more tightly associated with central (cSBP) than brachial (bSBP) systolic pressure remains debated, because of their close correlation and uncertain thresholds to differentiate cSBP into normotension versus hypertension.
methodsIn a person-level meta-analysis of the International Database of Central Arterial Properties for Risk Stratification (n=5576; 54.1% women; mean age 54.2 years), outcome-driven thresholds for cSBP were determined and whether the cross-classification of cSBP and bSBP improved risk stratification was explored. cSBP was tonometrically estimated from the radial pulse wave using SphygmoCor software.
resultsOver 4.1 years (median), 255 composite cardiovascular end points occurred. In multivariable bootstrapped analyses, cSBP thresholds (in mm Hg) of 110.5 (95% CI, 109.1-111.8), 120.2 (119.4-121.0), 130.0 (129.6-130.3), and 149.5 (148.4-150.5) generated 5-year cardiovascular risks equivalent to the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association bSBP thresholds of 120, 130, 140, and 160. Applying 120/130 mm Hg as cSBP/bSBP thresholds delineated concordant central and brachial normotension (43.1%) and hypertension (48.2%) versus isolated brachial hypertension (5.0%) and isolated central hypertension (3.7%). With concordant normotension as reference, the multivariable hazard ratios for the cardiovascular end point were 1.30 (95% CI, 0.58-2.94) for isolated brachial hypertension, 2.28 (1.21-4.30) for isolated central hypertension, and 2.02 (1.41-2.91) for concordant hypertension. The increased cardiovascular risk associated with isolated central and concordant hypertension was paralleled by cerebrovascular end points with hazard ratios of 3.71 (1.37-10.06) and 2.60 (1.35-5.00), respectively.
conclusionsIrrespective of the brachial blood pressure status, central hypertension increased cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk indicating the importance of controlling central hypertension.
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.