PS it is always best to check the National Library Of Medicine at
www.pubmed.com
European Heart Journal 2005 26(20):2120-2126;
Aims To investigate pulse pressure (PP) as an independent predictor of coronary heart disease (CHD) risk.
Methods and results On the basis of a 10-year follow-up of 5389 men aged 35–65 at recruitment into PROCAM, we used a proportional hazards model to calculate the effect of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and PP on CHD risk after correcting for age, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, smoking, diabetes, and family history of premature CHD. Increases of 10 mmHg in DBP, SBP, and PP were associated with an increased CHD hazard ratio (HR) of ~10%. When the group was divided into the age groups <50, 50–59, and >59 years, this relationship was seen in the age group 50–59 years for DBP, SBP, and PP and in men aged ≥60 for PP only (25% increase in HR).
Overall, CHD risk in men with PP ≥70 mmHg was more three times that of men with PP <50 mmHg. This increased risk was not apparent at age <50 years, was greatest at age >60 years, and was also present in men who were normotensive at recruitment (SBP ≤160 mmHg, DBP ≤95 mmHg).
Conclusion In older European men, increased PP is an important independent determinant of coronary risk, even among those initially considered normotensive.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000 Jul;36(1):130-8.Pulse pressure and risk for myocardial infarction and heart failure in the elderly.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether pulse pressure (PP), a measure of arterial stiffness, is an independent predictor of the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure (CHF) and overall mortality among community-dwelling elderly. BACKGROUND: Current hypertension guidelines classify cardiovascular risk on the basis of elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) without considering their combined effects. Recent studies suggest that PP is a strong predictor of cardiovascular end points, but few data are available among community elderly. METHODS: The study sample included 2,152 individuals age > or =65 years, who were participants in the Established Populations for Epidemiologic Study of the Elderly program, free of CHD and CHF at baseline and still alive at one year after enrollment. Blood pressure was measured at baseline. Incidence of CHD, incidence of CHF and total mortality were monitored in the following 10 years. RESULTS: There were 328 incident CHD events, 224 incident CHF events and 1,046 persons who died of any cause. Pulse pressure showed a strong and linear relationship with each end point. After adjusting for demographics, comorbidity and CHD risk factors, a 10-mm Hg increment in PP was associated with a 12% increase in CHD risk (95% confidence interval [CI], 2% to 22%), a 14% increase in CHF risk (95% CI, 5% to 24%), and a 6% increase in overall mortality (95% CI, 0% to 12%). While SBP and mean arterial pressure (MAP) also showed positive associations with the end points, PP yielded the highest likelihood ratio chi-square. When PP was entered in the model in conjunction with other blood pressure parameters (SBP, DBP, MAP or hypertension stage, respectively), the association remained positive for PP but became negative for the other blood pressure variables. The effect of PP persisted after adjusting for current medication use and was present in normotensive individuals and individuals with isolated systolic hypertension but not in individuals with diastolic hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated PP is a powerful independent predictor of cardiovascular end points in the elderly.
PMID: 10898424
Circulation. 1999 Jul 27;100(4):354-60. Is pulse pressure useful in predicting risk for coronary heart Disease? The Framingham heart study.
BACKGROUND: Current definitions of hypertension are based on levels of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), but not on pulse pressure (PP). We examined whether PP adds useful information for predicting coronary heart disease (CHD) in the population-based Framingham Heart Study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 1924 men and women between 50 and 79 years of age at baseline with no clinical evidence of CHD and not taking antihypertensive drug therapy. Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, and other risk factors, was used to assess the relations between blood pressure components and CHD risk over a 20-year follow-up. The association with CHD risk was positive for SBP, DBP, and PP, considering each pressure individually; of the 3, PP yielded the largest chi(2) statistic. When SBP and DBP were jointly entered into the multivariable model, the association with CHD risk was positive for SBP (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.30) and negative for DBP (HR, 0. 86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.98). Four subgroups were defined according to SBP levels (<120, 120 to 139, 140 to 159, and >/=160 mm Hg). Within each subgroup, the association with CHD risk was negative for DBP and positive for PP. A cross-classification of SBP-DBP levels confirmed these results. CONCLUSIONS: In the middle-aged and elderly, CHD risk increased with lower DBP at any level of SBP>/=120 mm Hg, suggesting that
higher PP was an important component of risk. Neither SBP nor DBP was superior to PP in predicting CHD risk.
PMID: 10421594