Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37206091›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2023

Predictive ability of visit-to-visit blood pressure indices for adverse events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: Subanalysis of the J-RHYTHM Registry.

Eitaro Kodani, Hiroshi Inoue, Hirotsugu Atarashi, Ken Okumura, Shinya Suzuki, Takeshi Yamashita, Hideki Origasa, J-RHYTHM Registry Investigators

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Recent highlights from theInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Is atrial fibrillation a suitable target for studies on blood pressure variability?Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Eitaro KodaniDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Nippon Medical School Tama Nagayama Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroshi InoueSaiseikai Toyama Hospital, Toyama, Japan.
Hirotsugu AtarashiAOI Hachioji Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Ken OkumuraSaiseikai Kumamoto Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan.
Shinya SuzukiThe Cardiovascular Institute, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi YamashitaThe Cardiovascular Institute, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideki OrigasaThe Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Tokyo, Japan.
J-RHYTHM Registry Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: We previously reported that standard deviation (SD) of systolic blood pressure (SBP), an index of BP variability, and SBP-time in target range (TTR), an index of BP consistency, were significantly associated with adverse events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Thus, this study aimed to compare predictive ability for adverse events among visit-to-visit BP variability/consistency indices using data from the J-RHYTHM Registry. Methods: Of 7406 outpatients with NVAF, 7226 (age, 69.7 ± 9.9 years; men, 70.7%), in whom BP was measured 4 times or more (14.6 ± 5.0 times) during the 2-year follow-up period or until occurrence of an event, were included. As BP consistency for target SBP between 110 and 130 mmHg, SBP-TTR by the Rosendaal method and SBP-frequency in range (FIR) were calculated. Predictive ability was expressed by the area under receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC). AUCs of SBP-TTR and SBP-FIR for adverse events were compared with those of SBP-SD by the DeLong's test. Results: SBP-SD, SBP-TTR, and SBP-FIR were 11.0 ± 4.2 mmHg, 49.5 ± 28.3%, and 52.3 ± 23.0%, respectively. AUCs of these indices for thromboembolism, major hemorrhage, and all-cause death were 0.62, 0.64, and 0.63 for SBP-SD; 0.56, 0.55, and 0.56 for SBP-TTR; and 0.55, 0.56, and 0.58 for SBP-FIR; respectively. AUCs of SBP-SD were significantly larger than those of SBP-TTR for major hemorrhage (P = 0.010) and all-cause death (P = 0.014), and SBP-FIR for major hemorrhage (P = 0.016). Conclusion: Among visit-to-visit BP variability/consistency indices, predictive ability of SBP-SD for major hemorrhage and all-cause death was superior to that of SBP-TTR and SBP-FIR in patients with NVAF.

Indexed as

Adverse eventsAtrial fibrillationConsistencyVariabilityVisit-to-visit blood pressure

Identifiers

PMID37206091
PMCPMC10189411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.