home Accueil > Essais thérapeutiques > PAMELA


25 juin 2016

Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni.

Previous studies have shown that in the treated fraction of the hypertensive population, blood pressure (BP) control is less common for systolic BP (SBP) than for diastolic BP (DBP) as measured in the physician’s office. Whether this phenomenon is artifactually attributable to a temporary increase in BP owing to a « white-coat » effect or represents a true rarity of SBP control in daily life is unknown.

Data were obtained from the PAMELA? (Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni) study population, which involved individuals ranging in age from 25 to 74 years who were representative of the residents of Monza (a city near Milan, Italy) and who were stratified according to sex. Office (an average of 3 sphygmomanometric measurements), home (an average of morning and evening self-measurements using a semiautomatic device), and 24-hour ambulatory (average of measurements performed every 20 minutes during the day and at night) BP values were obtained in all study subjects. In the treated hypertensive patients, BP was regarded as controlled if office values were less than 140 (SBP) or 90 (DBP) mm Hg. Home and 24-hour average SBP and DBP were regarded as controlled if the values were lower than 132/83 and 125/79 mm Hg, respectively.

In the study participants (n = 2051), the number of patients with hypertension who were receiving antihypertensive treatment was 398, or approximately 42% of all individuals with hypertension. In-office SBP control by treatment was less frequent than DBP control (29.9% vs? 41.5%, P<.05). This was also the case when home and 24-hour SBP and DBP control was considered (38.3% vs 54.6% and 50.8 vs 64.9%, respectively, P<.05 for both).

In the PAMELA? population, SBP control by treatment was much less frequent than DBP control by treatment. This was the case not only for office BP values but also for home and 24-hour BP values, demonstrating that inadequate SBP control is not limited to artificial BP-measuring methods but occurs in daily life.

Mancia G, Bombelli M, Lanzarotti A, Grassi G, Cesana G, Zanchetti A, Sega R. Systolic vs? diastolic blood pressure control in the hypertensive patients of the PAMELA? population. Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni.
Arch Intern Med. 2002 Mar 11 ;162(5):582-6. 11871927

In hypertensive patients, 24-hour blood pressure (BP) variability (V) shows a positive relationship with organ damage, organ damage progression, and cardiovascular morbidity. The clinical relevance of BPV in the population has never been investigated. In a sample of 3200 individuals, randomly selected from the general population of Monza (Milan, Italy), we evaluated BP by an automatic oscillometric device every 20 minutes for 24 hours and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) by echocardiography. In each subject, individual systolic and diastolic BP readings were averaged to obtain a 24-hour mean. Systolic BPV was obtained by calculating (1) the standard deviation of the 24-hour mean, which was taken as the overall BPV, (2) the cyclic components (Fourier spectral analysis) that in the population as a whole explained >95% of the overall BPV, and (3) the fraction of the overall BPV that in each subject was not accounted for by the 2 cyclic components, termed individual residual BPV. A similar procedure was used for diastolic BP and heart rate. Participation rate was 64.1%. Patients receiving antihypertensive therapy (n=403) were excluded from the analysis, which was therefore limited to 1648 participants. In the population as a whole, LVMI significantly related to 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP mean (beta=0.40 and beta=0.37, respectively, P<0.001> 11882636

Studies in hypertensive patients suggest that ambulatory blood pressure (BP) is prognostically superior to office BP. Much less information is available in the general population, however. Obtaining this information was the purpose of the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate e Loro Associazioni (PAMELA?) study.

Office, home, and 24-hour ambulatory BP values were obtained in 2051 subjects between 25 and 74 years of age who were representative of the general population of Monza (Milan, Italy). Subjects were followed up for an average of 131 months, during which time cardiovascular and noncardiovascular fatal events were recorded (n=186). Office, home, and ambulatory BP values showed a significant exponential direct relationship with risk of cardiovascular or all-cause death. The goodness of fit of the relationship was greater for systolic than for diastolic BP and for night than for day BP, but its overall value was not better for home or ambulatory than for office BP. The slope of the relationship, however, was progressively greater from office to home and ambulatory BP. Home and night BP modestly improved the goodness of fit of the risk model when added to office BP.

In the PAMELA? population, risk of death increased more with a given increase in home or ambulatory than in office BP. The overall ability to predict death, however, was not greater for home and ambulatory than for office BP, although it was somewhat increased by the combination of office and outside-of-office values. Systolic BP was almost invariably superior to diastolic BP, and night BP was superior to day BP.

Sega R, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, Cesana G, Corrao G, Grassi G, Mancia G. Prognostic value of ambulatory and home blood pressures compared with office blood pressure in the general population : follow-up results from the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate e Loro Associazioni (PAMELA?) study. Circulation. 2005 ;111:1777-83. 15809377