Visit-to-visit blood pressure variability and outcome: a traditional and a dose-response meta-analysis

Clicks: 1
ID: 316565
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #158 of 194 articles by views in european journal of preventive cardiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 194 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether the relationship of blood pressure variability (BPV) with outcome reported in several studies is linear or becomes evident only above a given BPV threshold value. This meta-analysis was aimed at exploring the shape of the relationship between visit-to-visit BPV (VVBPV) and mortality or fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, also addressing whether the number of visits considered for estimation of VVBPV has an impact on this relationship. METHODS: Pooled hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between VVBPV and outcomes were calculated by outcome type and number of visits used to estimate VVBPV. Restricted cubic spline meta-regression models were applied to explore the shape of this relationship and the presence of threshold values beyond which VVBPV significantly increases the risk of outcomes. RESULTS: The literature search identified 50 studies (n=10,624,740 individuals). The risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality began to increase significantly above specific VVBPV threshold values. Systolic VVBPV measured as standard deviation (SD) had a threshold of 11.8 mmHg for all-cause mortality and 12.1 mmHg for cardiovascular mortality. Diastolic VVBPV SD showed threshold values of 5.8 mmHg for all-cause mortality and 5.25 mmHg for cardiovascular mortality, the risk of these outcomes increasing significantly only when VVBPV exceed these values. Our study also provides indications that a minimum of three visits is required to reliably assess the prognostic value of VVBPV. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows a non-linear dose-response relationship between VVBPV and outcomes, with distinct threshold values. The identification of such thresholds is vital for assessing the prognostic value of BPV in research or clinical settings. A reliable assessment of the prognostic value of VVBPV should be based on at least three visits.
Reference Key
openalex_W7164018892 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Lorenza Scotti, Juan Eugenio Ochoa, Davide Soranna, Grzegorz Bilo, Antonella Zambon, Gianfranco Parati
Journal european journal of preventive cardiology
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/eurjpc/zwag305
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.