scholarly journals Combination of Echocardiography and Pulse Wave Velocity Provides Clues for the Differentiation between White Coat Hypertension and Hypertension in Postmenopausal Women

Pulse ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 131-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiromichi Suzuki ◽  
Kazuhiro Kobayashi ◽  
Hirokazu Okada
2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e30
Author(s):  
Rafael A. Faria ◽  
Annelise G. Paiva ◽  
Roberto Pozzan ◽  
Maria Eliane C. Magalhaes ◽  
Erika Maria G. Campana ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. S46
Author(s):  
K. Stolarz* ◽  
W. Wojciechowska ◽  
A. Olszanecka ◽  
W. Lubaszewski ◽  
M. Cwynar ◽  
...  

Hypertension ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sikarin Upala ◽  
Anawin Sanguankeo

Background: Previous studies have shown inconclusive effects of target organ damage from white-coat hypertension (WCHT). Arterial stiffness is involved in the atherosclerotic processes in the setting of sustained hypertension. This meta-analysis aimed to compare arterial stiffness in subjects with diagnosis of WCHT to subjects with normotension (NT) and SHT. Methods: A comprehensive search of the databases of the MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed from inception through May 2016. The inclusion criterion was the observational studies’ assessment of the association between WCHT and NT or SHT in adult subjects. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring was used to define WCHT (office BP≥140/90mmHg and daytime BP <135/85mmHg), and SHT (office BP≥140/90mmHg and daytime BP≥135/85mmHg). Aortic stiffness was assessed using Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) measurements. Pooled mean difference (MD) of PWV and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method. Results: Data were extracted from 4 observational studies involving 2,413 subjects. PWV is not different in patients with WCHT compared with SHT (pooled MD= -0.25 m/sec; 95% CI, -0.81 to 0.30; P-value=0.37, I 2 =74%). PWV in WCHT is also not different when compared with PWV in NT (MD= 0.86 m/sec; 95% CI, -0.30 to 2.03; P-value=0.15, I 2 =97%). Conclusion: In a meta-analysis, we observe that arterial stiffness measured by pulse wave velocity is not different in patients with white-coat hypertension when compared with sustained hypertension or normotension.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Semiha Terlemez Tokgöz ◽  
Dilek Yılmaz ◽  
Yavuz Tokgöz ◽  
Bülent Çelik ◽  
Yasin Bulut

AbstractBackgroundThe aim of this study was to determine and compare cardiovascular risks by assessing arterial stiffness in children with essential hypertension and white coat hypertension.MethodsPaediatric patients followed up with essential hypertension and white coat hypertension diagnoses and with no established end organ damage were involved in the study. Arterial stiffness in children included in the study was evaluated and compared by using the oscillometric device (Mobil-O-Graph) method.ResultsA total of 62 essential hypertension (34 male, 28 female), 38 white coat hypertension (21 male, 17 female), and 60 healthy controls (33 male, 27 female) were assessed in the present study. Pulse wave velocity of the essential hypertension, white coat hypertension, and control group was, respectively, as follows: 5.3±0.6 (m/s), 5.1±0.4 (m/s), 4.3±0.4 (m/s) (p<0.001); augmentation index outcomes were, respectively, determined as follows: 21.3±6.5, 19.3±6.4, 16.0±0.3 (p<0.001). Pulse wave velocity and augmentation index values of children with essential hypertension and white coat hypertension were found to be higher compared with the control group. This level was identified as correlated with the duration of hypertension in both patient groups (p<0.01).ConclusionArterial stiffness in children with essential hypertension and white coat hypertension was impaired compared with healthy children. This finding has made us think that white coat hypertension is not an innocent clinical situation. This information should be taken into consideration in the follow-up and treatment approaches of the patients.


2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1233-1238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pasquale Palmiero ◽  
Maria Maiello ◽  
David D. Daly ◽  
Marco Matteo Ciccone ◽  
Navin C. Nanda

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 812-813
Author(s):  
Sante D. Pierdomenico ◽  
Francesca Coccina ◽  
Rosalinda Madonna

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document