CUFF-BASED AND INTRAARTERIAL BRACHIAL BLOOD PRESSURE MISMATCH AND ITS POTENTIAL IMPACT ON ANTIHYPERTENSIVE TREATMENT AND ESTIMATION OF AORTIC BLOOD PRESSURE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Cuff-based brachial blood pressure (BP) is universally used as a guide to treat hypertension, although it can differ from the intraarterial BP. In this study, we examine the potential impact of cuff-to-intraarterial brachial systolic BP (bSBP) mismatch phenotypes on BP treatment and its impact on determination of central BP. Design and method: In 379 hypertensive subjects undergoing cardiac catheterization through the radial artery, non-invasive brachial cuff and central BPs were measured using the Mobil-o-Graph device simultaneously to intraarterial brachial and aortic BP. According to the difference between cuff-based bSBP (CUFF-bSBP) and intraarterial bSBP (IA-bSBP), we identified three phenotypes: Underestimation Mismatch group (CUFF-bSBP < IA-bSBP by more than 10 mmHg); No Mismatch group (CUFF-bSBP within 10 mmHg of IA-bSBP); Overestimation Mismatch group (CUFF-bSBP > IA-bSBP by more than 10 mmHg). Influence on ACC/AHA BP categories was evaluated and accuracy was determined following ARTERY society recommendations (mean difference <=5 ± 8 mmHg). Results: The Underestimation (n = 190), No Mismatch (n = 155) and Overestimation (n = 34) groups, despite overall similar clinical characteristics, showed only minor differences in CUFF-bSBP (127 ± 17, 123 ± 15, 126 ± 19 mmHg) despite highly different IA-bSBP (147 ± 18, 126 ± 16 vs 108 ± 18 mmHg, p < 0.001) and aortic SBP (136 ± 20, 122 ± 16, 109 ± 18 mmHg, p < 0.001). ACC/AHA BP categories were concordant in 33%, 68% and 44% of the Underestimation, No Mismatch and Overestimation groups. The Underestimation Mismatch group had 64% of individuals at risk of undertreatment compared to 16% in the No Mismatch Group, while in the Overestimation Mismatch Group 50% were at risk of overtreatment compared to 17% in the No Mismatch group. Cuff bSBP accurately estimated the aortic SBP only in the No Mismatch Group (mean difference 1.7 ± 8.2 mmHg) whereas central BP with the Mobil-o-Graph device did not reach the strict ARTERY criteria for accuracy in any groups. Conclusions: Our study shows that the brachial cuff underestimates and overestimates intraarterial brachial BP in a significant proportion of hypertensive subjects, potentially leading to an increased risk of BP mismanagement, and inaccurate non-invasive estimation of central BPs. This underlines the importance of improving the accuracy of cuff-based brachial and central BP monitors, ideally taking into consideration invasive BP phenotypes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".