1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Variation in blood pressure and long-term risk of dementia: A population-based cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Variation in blood pressure may relate to dementia risk via autonomic disturbance or hemodynamic mechanisms, but the long-term associations are unclear. We aimed to determine whether blood pressure variation over a period of years, considering both magnitude and direction, is associated with the risk of dementia.

          Methods and findings

          In a prospective cohort study ongoing since 1989 in the Netherlands, 5,273 dementia-free participants (58.1% women; mean [SD] age, 67.6 [8.0] years) were included. As of 2016, 1,059 dementia cases occurred during a median follow-up of 14.6 years. Absolute variation in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was assessed as the absolute difference in SBP divided by the mean over two sequential visits every 4.2 (median) years, with the first quantile set as the reference level. The direction was the rise or fall in SBP, with the third quantile set as the reference level. We estimated the risk of dementia in relation to SBP variation measured at different time windows (i.e., at least 0, 5, 10, and 15 years) prior to dementia diagnosis, with adjustments for age, sex, education, apolipoprotein E ( APOE) genotype, vascular risk factors, and history of cardiovascular disease. We repeated the above analysis for variation in diastolic blood pressure (DBP).

          A large SBP variation was associated with an increased dementia risk, which became more pronounced with longer intervals between the assessment of SBP variation and the diagnosis of dementia. The hazard ratio (HR) associated with large variation (the highest quintile) increased from 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88–1.34, P = 0.337) for risk within 5 years of SBP variation measurement to 3.13 (95% CI 2.05–4.77; P < 0.001) for risk after at least 15 years since the measurement of SBP variation. The increased long-term risk was associated with both large rises (HR for the highest quintile, 3.31 [95% CI 2.11–5.18], P < 0.001) and large falls in SBP (HR for the lowest quintile, 2.20 [95% CI 1.33–3.63], P = 0.002), whereas the higher short-term risk was only associated with large falls in SBP (HR, 1.21 [95% CI 1.00–1.48], P = 0.017). Similar findings were observed for variation in DBP. Despite our assessment of major confounders, potential residual confounding is possible, and the findings on blood pressure variability over periods of years may not be generalizable to variability over periods of days and other shorter periods.

          Conclusions

          Results of this study showed that a large blood pressure variation over a period of years was associated with an increased long-term risk of dementia. The association between blood pressure variation and dementia appears most pronounced when this variation occurred long before the diagnosis. An elevated long-term risk of dementia was observed with both a large rise and fall in blood pressure.

          Abstract

          Albert Hofman and colleagues investigate associations between individual blood pressure changes and dementia risk.

          Author summary

          Why was this study done?
          • Blood pressure rises throughout most of life, and hypertension is proposed as an important modifiable risk factor for dementia. In late life, the relationship between blood pressure and dementia is controversial.

          • Variation in blood pressure is suggested to be associated with dementia risk beyond absolute blood pressure levels, but the long-term associations are unclear. Whether the putative associations differ by direction of variation is also unknown.

          What did the researchers do and find?
          • In this prospective cohort study involving 5,273 dementia-free participants who were followed over 26 years, a large blood pressure variation, measured over two sequential visits every 4 years apart, was associated with an increased risk of dementia, especially when this variation occurred long before the diagnosis.

          • Both large rises and falls in blood pressure were associated with a higher long-term risk.

          What do these findings mean?
          • This study suggests the potential importance of blood pressure variability in the etiology of dementia.

          • If the observed association is causal, our study suggests an opportunity to prevent dementia through targeting large variation in blood pressure over a period of years above and beyond the mere control of conventional blood pressure limits.

          • The stronger association over longer intervals thereby suggests greater benefits from interventions implemented earlier in life.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Dementia prevention, intervention, and care

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

            Objective To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure, independent of mean blood pressure, with cardiovascular disease events and mortality. Data sources Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science, searched to 15 February 2016 for full text articles in English. Eligibility criteria for study selection Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in adults, except those in patients receiving haemodialysis, where the condition may directly impact blood pressure variability. Standardised hazard ratios were extracted and, if there was little risk of confounding, combined using random effects meta-analysis in main analyses. Outcomes included all cause and cardiovascular disease mortality and cardiovascular disease events. Measures of variability included standard deviation, coefficient of variation, variation independent of mean, and average real variability, but not night dipping or day-night variation. Results 41 papers representing 19 observational cohort studies and 17 clinical trial cohorts, comprising 46 separate analyses were identified. Long term variability in blood pressure was studied in 24 papers, mid-term in four, and short-term in 15 (two studied both long term and short term variability). Results from 23 analyses were excluded from main analyses owing to high risks of confounding. Increased long term variability in systolic blood pressure was associated with risk of all cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.22), cardiovascular disease mortality (1.18, 1.09 to 1.28), cardiovascular disease events (1.18, 1.07 to 1.30), coronary heart disease (1.10, 1.04 to 1.16), and stroke (1.15, 1.04 to 1.27). Increased mid-term and short term variability in daytime systolic blood pressure were also associated with all cause mortality (1.15, 1.06 to 1.26 and 1.10, 1.04 to 1.16, respectively). Conclusions Long term variability in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes, over and above the effect of mean blood pressure. Associations are similar in magnitude to those of cholesterol measures with cardiovascular disease. Limited data for mid-term and short term variability showed similar associations. Future work should focus on the clinical implications of assessment of variability in blood pressure and avoid the common confounding pitfalls observed to date. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014015695.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Arterial stiffness, pressure and flow pulsatility and brain structure and function: the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility--Reykjavik study.

              Aortic stiffness increases with age and vascular risk factor exposure and is associated with increased risk for structural and functional abnormalities in the brain. High ambient flow and low impedance are thought to sensitize the cerebral microcirculation to harmful effects of excessive pressure and flow pulsatility. However, haemodynamic mechanisms contributing to structural brain lesions and cognitive impairment in the presence of high aortic stiffness remain unclear. We hypothesized that disproportionate stiffening of the proximal aorta as compared with the carotid arteries reduces wave reflection at this important interface and thereby facilitates transmission of excessive pulsatile energy into the cerebral microcirculation, leading to microvascular damage and impaired function. To assess this hypothesis, we evaluated carotid pressure and flow, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, brain magnetic resonance images and cognitive scores in participants in the community-based Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility--Reykjavik study who had no history of stroke, transient ischaemic attack or dementia (n = 668, 378 females, 69-93 years of age). Aortic characteristic impedance was assessed in a random subset (n = 422) and the reflection coefficient at the aorta-carotid interface was computed. Carotid flow pulsatility index was negatively related to the aorta-carotid reflection coefficient (R = -0.66, P<0.001). Carotid pulse pressure, pulsatility index and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity were each associated with increased risk for silent subcortical infarcts (hazard ratios of 1.62-1.71 per standard deviation, P<0.002). Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity was associated with higher white matter hyperintensity volume (0.108 ± 0.045 SD/SD, P = 0.018). Pulsatility index was associated with lower whole brain (-0.127 ± 0.037 SD/SD, P<0.001), grey matter (-0.079 ± 0.038 SD/SD, P = 0.038) and white matter (-0.128 ± 0.039 SD/SD, P<0.001) volumes. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (-0.095 ± 0.043 SD/SD, P = 0.028) and carotid pulse pressure (-0.114 ± 0.045 SD/SD, P = 0.013) were associated with lower memory scores. Pulsatility index was associated with lower memory scores (-0.165 ± 0.039 SD/SD, P<0.001), slower processing speed (-0.118 ± 0.033 SD/SD, P<0.001) and worse performance on tests assessing executive function (-0.155 ± 0.041 SD/SD, P<0.001). When magnetic resonance imaging measures (grey and white matter volumes, white matter hyperintensity volumes and prevalent subcortical infarcts) were included in cognitive models, haemodynamic associations were attenuated or no longer significant, consistent with the hypothesis that increased aortic stiffness and excessive flow pulsatility damage the microcirculation, leading to quantifiable tissue damage and reduced cognitive performance. Marked stiffening of the aorta is associated with reduced wave reflection at the interface between carotid and aorta, transmission of excessive flow pulsatility into the brain, microvascular structural brain damage and lower scores in various cognitive domains.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Med
                PLoS Med
                plos
                plosmed
                PLoS Medicine
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1549-1277
                1549-1676
                12 November 2019
                November 2019
                : 16
                : 11
                : e1002933
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                [2 ] Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                [3 ] Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                Guys & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, UNITED KINGDOM
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0207-3620
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2226-4050
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6293-806X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4586-4035
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0372-8585
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9865-121X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0173-9571
                Article
                PMEDICINE-D-19-01627
                10.1371/journal.pmed.1002933
                6850672
                31714941
                6393f929-cd16-4c05-b22a-5dd495a0c0c5
                © 2019 Ma et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 7 May 2019
                : 9 September 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 3, Pages: 16
                Funding
                Funded by: Erasmus Medical Center and Erasmus University
                Funded by: Netherlands Organization for the Health Research and Development (ZonMw)
                Funded by: the Research Institute for Diseases in the Elderly (RIDE)
                Funded by: the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science; the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sports; the European Commission (DG XII)
                Funded by: the Municipality of Rotterdam
                Funded by: Janssen Prevention Center
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Rose Travelling Fellowship
                Award Recipient :
                The Rotterdam Study is funded by Erasmus Medical Center and Erasmus University, Rotterdam; Netherlands Organization for the Health Research and Development (ZonMw); the Research Institute for Diseases in the Elderly (RIDE); the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science; the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sports; the European Commission (DG XII), and the Municipality of Rotterdam. This work was partially supported by an unrestricted grant from the Janssen Prevention Center. YM was sponsored by the Rose Travelling Fellowship. The funding organizations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Vascular Medicine
                Blood Pressure
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Cardiovascular Medicine
                Cardiovascular Diseases
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pharmacology
                Drugs
                Antihypertensives
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Physiology
                Physiological Parameters
                Body Weight
                Body Mass Index
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Physiology
                Physiological Parameters
                Body Weight
                Body Mass Index
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Cerebrovascular Diseases
                Vascular Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Dementia
                Vascular Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Dementia
                Vascular Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Dementia
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Dementia
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Neurodegenerative Diseases
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Cardiology
                Custom metadata
                Rotterdam Study data can be made available to interested researchers upon request. Requests can be directed to data manager Frank J. A. van Rooij ( f.vanrooij@ 123456erasmusmc.nl ), or visit the following website for more information: http://www.ergoonderzoek.nl/wp/contact. We are unable to place data in a public repository due to legal and ethical restraints. Sharing of individual participant data was not included in the informed consent of the study, and there is potential risk of revealing participants’ identities, as it is not possible to completely anonymize the data.

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article