Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Does the reduction in systolic blood pressure alone explain the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy?

Journal of Human Hypertension volume 18, pages S23–S28 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

Systolic blood pressure (SBP) is an important determinant of the development and regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in hypertensive humans. However, comparative assessments with other BP components are scarce and generally limited in size. As part of the Progetto Ipertensione Umbria Monitoraggio Ambulatoriale (PIUMA), 743 hypertensive subjects underwent echocardiography and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring before and after an average of 3.9 years of treatment. The changes in left ventricular mass showed a significant direct association with the changes in 24-h SBP (r=0.40), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (r=0.33) and pulse pressure (PP) (r=0.35). Weaker associations were found with the changes in clinic BP (r=0.32, 0.31 and 0.16, respectively). In a multivariate linear regression analysis, the changes in 24-h SBP were the sole independent determinants of the changes in left ventricular mass (LVM) according to the following equation: percentage changes in LVM=0.73 × (percentage changes in 24-h SBP) −0.48 (P<0.0001). For any given reduction in 24-h SBP, the reduction in LVM did not show any association with the changes in DBP and PP, either clinic or ambulatory. These data indicate that SBP is the principal determinant of LVH regression in hypertensive humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Levy D et al. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 1561–1566.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Devereux RB, Roman MJ . Hypertensive cardiac hypertrophy: pathophysiologic and clinical characteristics. In: Laragh JH and Brenner BM (eds). Hypertension: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Management, 2nd edn. Raven Press, Ltd: New York, 1995, pp 409–424.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Verdecchia P et al. Circadian blood pressure changes and left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension. Circulation 1990; 81: 528–536.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Nichols WW, O’Rourke MF . Atherosclerosis. In: Arnold E (ed). McDonald's Blood Flow in Arteries: Theoretical, Experimental and Clinical Principles. London, 1998, pp 396–401, Chapter 18.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pannier B et al. Pulse pressure and echocardiographic findings in essential hypertension. J Hypertens 1989; 7: 127–132.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Baguet JP et al. Relationships between cardiovascular remodelling and the pulse pressure in never treated hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 2000; 14: 23–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mourad JJ et al. Effect of hypertension on cardiac mass and radial artery wall thickness. Am J Cardiol 2000; 86: 564–567.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Verdecchia P et al. Prevalent influence of systolic over pulse pressure on left ventricular mass in essential hypertension. Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 658–665.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mancia G et al. Ambulatory blood pressure is superior to clinic blood pressure in predicting treatment-induced regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. SAMPLE Study Group. Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation. Circulation 1997; 95: 1464–1470.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Verdecchia P et al. Long-term effects of losartan and enalapril, alone or with a diuretic, on ambulatory blood pressure and cardiac performance in hypertension: a case–control study. Blood Press Monit 2000; 5: 187–193.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Verdecchia P et al. Ambulatory blood pressure: an independent predictor of prognosis in essential hypertension. Hypertension 1994; 24: 793–801.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Verdecchia P et al. Prognostic significance of serial changes in left ventricular mass in essential hypertension. Circulation 1998; 97: 48–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Verdecchia P et al. Quantitative assessment of day-to-day spontaneous variability in non-invasive ambulatory blood pressure measurements in essential hypertension. J Hypertens 1991; 9(Suppl 6): S322–S323.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Devereux RB et al. Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular hypertrophy: comparison to necropsy findings. Am J Cardiol 1986; 57: 450–458.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Verdecchia P et al. Improved cardiovascular risk stratification by a simple ECG index in hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2003; 16: 646–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Grossman W, Jones D, McLaurin LP . Wall stress and patterns of hypertrpophy in the human left ventricle. J Clin Invest 1975; 56: 56–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ganau A et al. Relation of left ventricular hemodynamic load and contractile performance to left ventricular mass in hypertension. Circulation 1990; 81: 25–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. de Simone G, Pasanisi F, Contaldo F . Link of nonhemodynamic factors to hemodynamic determinants of left ventricular hypertrophy. Hypertension 2001; 38: 13–18.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Verdecchia P et al. Circulating insulin and insulin growth factor-1 are independent determinants of left ventricular mass and geometry in essential hypertension. Circulation 1999; 100: 1802–1807.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Verdecchia P . Prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressure. Current evidence and clinical implications. Hypertension 2000; 35: 844–851.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gosse P et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients treated with indapamide SR 1.5 mg vs enalapril 20 mg: the LIVE study. J Hypertens 2000; 18: 1465–1475.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Liebson PR et al. Comparison of five antihypertensive monotherapies and placebo for change in left ventricular mass in patients receiving nutritional–hygienic therapy in the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS). Circulation 1995; 91: 698–706.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Hospital R. Silvestrini, Perugia, Italy

    P Verdecchia, F Angeli & C Porcellati

  2. Divisione di Medicina Generale, Ospedale di Città della Pieve, Perugia, Italy

    R Gattobigio & G Benemio

  3. Divisione di Medicina Generale, Ospedale di Castiglione del Lago, Perugia, Italy

    M Guerrieri

Authors
  1. P Verdecchia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F Angeli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R Gattobigio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M Guerrieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G Benemio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C Porcellati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P Verdecchia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verdecchia, P., Angeli, F., Gattobigio, R. et al. Does the reduction in systolic blood pressure alone explain the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy?. J Hum Hypertens 18 (Suppl 2), S23–S28 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001797

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001797

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links