Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes Across Antihypertensive Regimens

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) is associated with cardiovascular risk beyond mean BP. Whether first-line antihypertensive regimens differentially affect BPV and cardiovascular outcomes remains uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a target trial emulation using pooled individual participant data from 2 randomized trials: ACCORD-BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure) and SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Propensity score matching was used for pairwise comparisons of RAS (renin–angiotensin system) inhibitors, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, as monotherapy or in combination. Follow-up was initiated at a predefined baseline medication assessment. The primary outcome was visit-to-visit systolic BPV, assessed using variation independent of the mean. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events and its individual components. RESULTS: The final cohort included 5779 participants (median of 12 BP measurements and median follow-up of 3.5 years), among whom 2754 were included in the matched analysis. CCB-based regimens were consistently associated with significantly lower systolic BPV compared with both RAS inhibitor-based and diuretic-based regimens. This association was consistent across monotherapy (CCB versus RAS: β=−1.341 [95% CI, −1.930 to −0.752]; P <0.001) and combination therapies (CCB+diuretic versus RAS+diuretic: β=−1.299 [95% CI, −1.852 to −0.747]; P <0.001). In contrast, RAS inhibitor–based and diuretic-based regimens demonstrated comparable BPV profiles. 215 (3.7%) major adverse cardiovascular event events were observed in the overall cohort. No significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular event or individual components were observed across comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk hypertensive patients receiving target-driven BP management, CCB-based regimens were associated with lower visit-to-visit systolic BPV compared with RAS inhibitor–based and diuretic-based regimens. However, these differences were not accompanied by detectable differences in cardiovascular outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hypertension
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.126.27140
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes Across Antihypertensive Regimens

Xunming Ji, Hugh S. Markus, Zihan Sun, Wenbo Zhao et al.
Hypertension
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
article

Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes Across Antihypertensive Regimens

Xunming Ji, Hugh S. Markus, Zihan Sun, Wenbo Zhao, Eric L. Harshfield, Yue Qiao
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) is associated with cardiovascular risk beyond mean BP. Whether first-line antihypertensive regimens differentially affect BPV and cardiovascular outcomes remains uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a target trial emulation using pooled individual participant data from 2 randomized trials: ACCORD-BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure) and SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Propensity score matching was used for pairwise comparisons of RAS (renin–angiotensin system) inhibitors, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, as monotherapy or in combination. Follow-up was initiated at a predefined baseline medication assessment. The primary outcome was visit-to-visit systolic BPV, assessed using variation independent of the mean. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events and its individual components. RESULTS: The final cohort included 5779 participants (median of 12 BP measurements and median follow-up of 3.5 years), among whom 2754 were included in the matched analysis. CCB-based regimens were consistently associated with significantly lower systolic BPV compared with both RAS inhibitor-based and diuretic-based regimens. This association was consistent across monotherapy (CCB versus RAS: β=−1.341 [95% CI, −1.930 to −0.752]; P <0.001) and combination therapies (CCB+diuretic versus RAS+diuretic: β=−1.299 [95% CI, −1.852 to −0.747]; P <0.001). In contrast, RAS inhibitor–based and diuretic-based regimens demonstrated comparable BPV profiles. 215 (3.7%) major adverse cardiovascular event events were observed in the overall cohort. No significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular event or individual components were observed across comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk hypertensive patients receiving target-driven BP management, CCB-based regimens were associated with lower visit-to-visit systolic BPV compared with RAS inhibitor–based and diuretic-based regimens. However, these differences were not accompanied by detectable differences in cardiovascular outcomes.

Hypertension
Capital Medical University (CN), Neurosciences Institute (US), Chinese Institute for Brain Research (CN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.