OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of empagliflozin combined with sacubitril/valsartan in treating hypertensive patients with heart failure (HF), focusing on its effects on blood pressure variability (BPV) and cardiac function.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 101 patients with hypertension and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated at Baoji High-Tech Hospital from October 2021 to October 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: an observation group (n=51), treated with both empagliflozin and sacubitril/valsartan, and a control group (n=50), treated with sacubitril/valsartan alone. We compared the therapeutic effects, BPV (including 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime systolic and diastolic BPV), cardiac function indicators, levels of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) before and after treatment, and the incidence of adverse reactions between the groups. Independent risk factors affecting treatment efficacy were also analyzed.
RESULTS: The total effective rate of treatment in the observation group was significantly higher than in the control group (P<0.05). Both groups showed reductions in daytime and nighttime systolic and diastolic BPV after treatment, with the observation group displaying more pronounced improvements (all P<0.05). Enhancements in cardiac ultrasound measurements, NT-proBNP levels, and cTnI levels were more significant in the observation group compared to the control group post-treatment (both P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions during treatment between the two groups (P>0.05). Age and comorbid diabetes were identified as independent risk factors for poor prognosis, while treatment with empagliflozin combined with sacubitril/valsartan was a protective factor.
CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin combined with sacubitril/valsartan significantly enhances treatment efficacy in hypertensive patients with heart failure, effectively improves cardiac function and BPV, and demonstrates good safety.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence demonstrates that visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure (SBP) variability is a prognostic factor of TBI. However, literature regarding the impact of initial blood pressure management on the outcomes of TBI patients is limited. We aimed to further validate the clinical significance of BPV on the prognostic outcomes of patients with TBI.
METHODS: We performed the analysis by using individual patient-level data acquired from the eICU-CRD, which collected 200,859 ICU admissions of 139,367 patients in 2014 and 2015 from 208 US hospitals. Adult patients with traumatic intraparenchymal hemorrhage or contusion were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was discharge-home rate. Blood pressure variability (BPV) was calculated according to standard criteria: at least six measurements were taken in the first 24 h (hyperacute group) and 36 over days 2-7 (acute group). We estimated the associations between BPV and outcomes with logistic and proportional odds regression models. The key parameter for BPV was standard deviation (SD) of SBP, categorized into quintiles. We also calculated the average real variability (ARV), as well as maximum, minimum, and mean SBP for comparison in our analysis.
RESULTS: We studied 1486 patients in the hyperacute group and 857 in the acute group. SD of SBP had a significant association with the in-hospital mortality for both the hyperacute group (highest quintile adjusted OR 2.28 95% CI 1.18-4.42; ptrend<0.001) and the acute group (highest quintile adjusted OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.08-4.36; ptrend<0.001). The strongest predictors of primary outcome were SD of SBP in the hyperacute phase and minimum SBP in the acute phase. Associations were similar for the discharge-home rate (for the hyperacute group, highest quintile adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.89; ptrend<0.001; for the acute group OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.95; ptrend<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Systolic BPV seems to predict a poor outcome in patients with TBI. The benefits of early treatment to maintain appropriate SBP level might be enhanced by smooth and sustained control.

Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability (BPV) predicts age-related hippocampal atrophy, neurodegeneration, and memory decline in older adults. Beat-to-beat BPV may represent a more reliable and efficient tool for prospective risk assessment, but it is unknown whether beat-to-beat BPV is similarly associated with hippocampal neurodegeneration, or with plasma markers of neuroaxonal/neuroglial injury. Independently living older adults without a history of dementia, stroke, or other major neurological disorders were recruited from the community (N = 104; age = 69.5 ± 6.7 (range 55-89); 63% female). Participants underwent continuous blood pressure monitoring, brain MRI, venipuncture, and cognitive testing over two visits. Hippocampal volumes, plasma neurofilament light, and glial fibrillary acidic protein levels were assessed. Beat-to-beat BPV was quantified as systolic blood pressure average real variability during 7-min of supine continuous blood pressure monitoring. The cross-sectional relationship between beat-to-beat BPV and hippocampal volumes, cognitive domain measures, and plasma biomarkers was assessed using multiple linear regression with adjustment for demographic covariates, vascular risk factors, and average systolic blood pressure. Elevated beat-to-beat BPV was associated with decreased left hippocampal volume (P = .008), increased plasma concentration of glial fibrillary acidic protein (P = .006), and decreased memory composite score (P = .02), independent of age, sex, average systolic blood pressure, total intracranial volume, and vascular risk factor burden. In summary, beat-to-beat BPV is independently associated with decreased left hippocampal volume, increased neuroglial injury, and worse memory ability. Findings are consistent with prior studies examining visit-to-visit BPV and suggest beat-to-beat BPV may be a useful marker of hemodynamic brain injury in older adults.

Visit-to-visit (VVV) blood pressure variability (BPV) is associated with cardiovascular disease. However, in practice, BPV at sequential clinic visits is often regarded as mere random fluctuations and frequently under-appreciated by the clinicians. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to compare the effect size of VVV BPV on cardiovascular outcome, by comparing studies that have used the electronic health record (EHR) and non-EHR data. The pooled hazard ratio for VVV BPV is comparable between studies using EHR and non-EHR data. Studies using EHR reported a pooled hazard ratio (HR) for VVV systolic BPV of 1.22 (95% CI: 1.07-1.38), while non-EHR studies had a HR of 1.16 (95% CI: 1.10-1.22). The pooled HR for VVV diastolic BPV in EHR studies was 1.09 (95% CI: 0.86-1.39), whereas non-EHR studies showed a HR of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.04-1.17). EHR data is a reliable source for assessing BPV, which in turn can predict the CVD outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Abnormal blood pressure pattern is an independent risk factor for vascular events. Blood pressure variability can predict cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease outcomes and is closely associated with the risk of cognitive impairment. However, the relationship between blood pressure variability and cerebral small vessel disease neuroimaging markers remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between blood pressure variability and cerebral small vessel disease neuroimaging markers.
UNASSIGNED: We searched multiple databases, including Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, UpToDate, and World of Science, from their inception until November 27, 2023.Main Outcomes and Measures: A meta-analysis of 19 observational studies involving 14519 participants was performed. Findings: ①Systolic blood pressure variability was correlated with the cerebral small vessel disease total burden, white matter hyperintensities and lacunar infarction; ② Diastolic blood pressure variability was correlated with the cerebral small vessel disease total burden, white matter hyperintensities and cerebral microbleeds; ③ Non-dipping patterns were correlated with white matter hyperintensities and lacunar infarction. ④ Reverse-dipping patterns were significantly correlated with white matter hyperintensities and cerebral microbleeds.
UNASSIGNED: and Relevance: Blood pressure variability correlates with neuroimaging markers of cerebral small vessel disease and its burden. Hence, early monitoring and intervention of blood pressure variability may be essential for the early diagnosis, prevention and treatment of cerebral small vessel disease.

The proportion of time that blood pressure (BP) readings are at treatment target levels, commonly referred to as time at target or time in therapeutic range (BP-TTR), is emerging as a useful measure for evaluating hypertension management effectiveness and assessing longitudinal BP control. However, method of determination for BP-TTR differs across studies. This review identifies variations in BP-TTR determination methodologies and its potential prognostic value for cardiovascular outcomes. Following PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guidelines, literature was systematically searched in Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL. Relevant clinical trials, observational studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and systematic reviews published in English were screened. Of 369 articles identified, 17 articles were included. Studies differed in the BP targets used (e.g., BP < 140/90 mmHg or 130/80 mmHg; systolic BP within 110-130 mmHg or 120-140 mmHg), BP-TTR measurement duration (range 24 h to 15 years), and calculation method (linear interpolation method, n = 12 [71%]; proportion of BP readings at target, n = 5 [29%]). Regardless of method, studies consistently demonstrated that higher BP-TTR was associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Six of eight studies found the association was independent of mean achieved BP or last measured BP. Despite variation in methods of BP-TTR determination, these studies demonstrated the potential prognostic value of BP-TTR for cardiovascular outcomes beyond current BP control measures. We recommend standardization of BP-TTR methodology, with preference for linear interpolation method when BP measurements are few or less frequent, and proportion of BP readings method when large number of BP readings are available.

BACKGROUND: The predictive role of blood pressure variability for all-cause mortality and fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events has been described in the general population and in patients with diabetes, independently of mean BP. Although systolic blood pressure variability has been proposed as an informative measure for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease, its role in kidney transplant recipients is still debatable.
RESULTS: We performed a retrospective, observational, monocentric analysis of all kidney transplant recipients in follow-up at the outpatient Nephrology Clinic of San Martino Hospital from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016, who underwent kidney transplantation >12 months. The primary outcome was a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure). Visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability was expressed as the SD of systolic blood pressure values recorded at baseline and 3 months up to 18 months. Among the 272 patients (mean age, 64±13; 63% men) included in the present analyses, for each increase of 2.7 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure SD, the risk for events increased 3-fold (hazard ratio [HR], 3.1 [95% CI, 1.19-7.88]; P=0.02), and patients in the highest tertile of systolic blood pressure SD showed a 4-fold increased risk (HR, 4.1 [95% CI, 1.34-12.43]; P=0.01). This relationship was maintained even after incremental adjustment for time-averaged pulse pressure, age, diabetes, and prior cardiovascular event (HR, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.1-10.0]; P=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term blood pressure variability represents a risk factor for cardiovascular events in kidney transplant recipients, even independently by several confounding factors including blood pressure load.

Background: This study investigated the potential link between blood pressure variability (BPV) and the incidence of aortic stenosis (AS) using Korean National Health Insurance Service data from 2002 to 2019. Methods: We collected annual systolic blood pressure variability (SBPV) measurements consisting of three consecutive blood pressure readings each year over three years. The obtained SBPV data was divided into five quantiles, with the highest quintile representing a high fluctuation of blood pressure. Results: Analyzing 9,341,629 individuals with a mean age of 40.7 years, the study found 3981 new AS diagnoses during an average 8.66-year follow-up. Independent predictors for AS included higher blood pressure levels and elevated systolic blood pressure variability (SBPV). The hazard ratios (HR) for different SBPV quintiles compared to the reference (1st quintile) were as follows: 2nd quintile HR 1.09 (p = 0.18), 3rd quintile HR 1.13 (p = 0.04), 4th quintile HR 1.13 (p = 0.04), and 5th quintile HR 1.39 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that both hypertension and high fluctuations in SBP during consecutive visits are associated with an increased risk of incident AS. These results emphasize the importance of blood pressure management and stability in the prevention of AS.

Blood pressure variability (BPV) impacts brain health by influencing brain structure and cerebrovascular pathologies, though the mechanisms are poorly understood. Changes in the cerebrovasculature may lead to late-onset depression, cognitive impairment, and dementia, however the relationship between BPV with depression and anxiety remains unclear, due to methodological differences and inconsistencies in past research. This review aims to clarify the association between BPV with depression and anxiety in adults to inform understandings of the mechanisms implicating BPV in cognitive health. A systematic search from inception through to January 2024 was performed on Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that assessed BPV quantified by beat-to-beat, 24-hour, or visit-to-visit were eligible if the standardised assessment of depression and/or anxiety were reported as a linear association, or mean differences across control and affect groups. A total of 14 articles reporting on 13 samples and N = 5055 persons met the inclusion criteria (median female proportion = 61 %, range 0 % - 76 %). A meta-analysis was not possible due to methodological heterogeneity in BPV measurements and metrics across studies. Mixed results were observed across depression studies with inconsistencies and variation in the direction, strength of association, and BPV metric. There was weak evidence from only three studies to support a linear association between systolic coefficient of variation and anxiety. Collectively, the findings contribute to understanding the association between BPV and brain health, suggesting that any relationship between BPV and brain structures critical for cognitive function are independent of depression and only modestly implicate anxiety.

Higher blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) was shown to be strong predictors of poor cardiovascular outcomes in heart failure (HF). It is currently unknown if low-level tragus stimulation (LLTS) would lead to improvement in BPV in acute HF (AHF). The 22 patients with AHF (median 80 yrs, males 60%) were randomly assigned to active or sham group using an ear clip attached to the tragus (active group) or the earlobe (sham group) for 1 h daily over 5 days. In the active group, standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV) and δ in SBP were significantly decreased after LLTS (all p < 0.05). All the changes in SD, CV and δ in SBP before and after stimulation were also significantly different between active and sham groups (all p < 0.05). This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the beneficial effects of LLTS on BPV in AHF.