Control of blood pressure in hypertensive children and adolescents assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
Issued Date
2024-12-01
Resource Type
eISSN
14712431
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85191331872
Pubmed ID
38658852
Journal Title
BMC Pediatrics
Volume
24
Issue
1
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
BMC Pediatrics Vol.24 No.1 (2024)
Suggested Citation
Vigraijaroenying K., Pirojsakul K., Katanyuwong P., Tangnararatchakit K., Saisawat P., Chantarogh S., Paksi W., Bunmee U. Control of blood pressure in hypertensive children and adolescents assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. BMC Pediatrics Vol.24 No.1 (2024). doi:10.1186/s12887-024-04732-z Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/98203
Title
Control of blood pressure in hypertensive children and adolescents assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: There have been few studies evaluating the control of hypertension (HT) in children. This study aimed to assess the control of HT using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and to compare the parameters between the uncontrolled HT and controlled HT groups. Methods: Hypertensive patients aged ≥ 5 years who underwent ABPM to assess the control of HT were enrolled. Demographics, office blood pressure (BP), ABPM, and echocardiographic data were collected. Controlled HT was defined using a BP goal recommended by the 2016 European Society of Hypertension guidelines. Results: There were 108 patients (64.8% males) with a mean age of 14.3 years and 51.9% had primary HT. Controlled HT was detected in 41.1% and 33.3% by office BP and ABPM, respectively. Based on ABPM, there was a greater prevalence of controlled HT in the primary HT than the secondary HT group (44.6% vs. 21.2%, P = 0.01). In the primary HT group, BMI z-score at the last follow-up had a significant decrease in the controlled HT than the uncontrolled HT group (-0.39 vs. 0.01, P = 0.032). Primary HT was negatively associated with uncontrolled HT by ABPM. In addition, ABPM showed greater sensitivity (77.8% vs. 55.8%) and negative predictive value (80.9% vs. 70.8%) to predict LVH than those of office BP measurement. Conclusion: Only one-third of patients achieved the BP goal by ABPM and most were in the primary HT group. Weight reduction is an important measure of BP control in patients with primary HT to attenuate the risk of LVH.