Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Ultrasound Assessment of Endothelial-Dependent Flow-Mediated Vasodilation of the Brachial Artery in Clinical Research
Published on: October 22, 2014
Single versus combined blood pressure components and risk for cardiovascular disease: the Framingham Heart Study
Stanley S Franklin1, Victor A Lopez, Nathan D Wong
1Heart Disease Prevention Program, Department of Medicine, C240 Medical Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA. ssfranklinmd@earthlink.net
Insights
Combining blood pressure components like systolic and diastolic BP, or pulse pressure and mean arterial pressure, improves cardiovascular disease event prediction compared to single measures. Risk varied with component levels.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Epidemiology
- Biostatistics
Background:
- The predictive value of single versus combined blood pressure (BP) components for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events remains unclear.
- This study investigated the utility of systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), pulse pressure (PP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) individually and in combination for CVD event prediction.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of single BP components against combined BP components (SBP+DBP and PP+MAP) in predicting CVD events.
- To assess the incremental predictive value of combining different BP measures.
Main Methods:
- Utilized data from the Framingham Heart Study (original and offspring cohorts) comprising 9657 participants.
- Employed pooled logistic regression with BP components analyzed both categorically and continuously.
- Assessed model fit improvements and significant interactions between BP components.
Main Results:
- Combined BP components (SBP+DBP and PP+MAP) significantly improved model fit compared to individual BP components (P<0.05 to P<0.0001).
- Significant interactions were observed between SBP and DBP (P=0.02), and PP and MAP (P=0.01).
- Models using continuous SBP+DBP and PP+MAP showed identical predictive performance for CVD events. Adding a quadratic DBP term further enhanced prediction.
Conclusions:
- Combined BP components (PP+MAP and SBP+DBP) offer superior prediction of CVD events compared to single BP components.
- The predictive capability of combined measures varied with the level of each component.
- While PP+MAP may offer hemodynamic insights, SBP+DBP demonstrated comparable predictive power for CVD events.
Background:
The utility of single versus combined blood pressure (BP) components in predicting cardiovascular disease (CVD) events is not established. We compared systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) versus pulse pressure (PP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) combined and each of these 4 BP components alone in predicting CVD events.
Methods And Results:
In participants in the original (n=4760) and offspring (n=4897) Framingham Heart Study who were free of CVD events and BP-lowering therapy, 1439 CVD events occurred over serial 4-year intervals from 1952 to 2001. In pooled logistic regression with the use of BP categories, combining SBP with DBP and PP with MAP improved model fit compared with individual BP components (P<0.05 to P<0.0001). Significant interactions were noted between SBP and DBP (P=0.02) and between PP and MAP (P=0.01) in their respective multivariable models. Models with continuous variables for SBP+DBP and PP+MAP proved identical in predicting CVD events (Akaike Information Criteria=10 625 for both). Addition of a quadratic DBP(2) term to DBP and SBP further improved fit (P=0.0016).
Conclusions:
Combining PP with MAP and SBP with DBP produced models that were superior to single BP components for predicting CVD, and the extent of CVD risk varied with the level of each BP component. The combination of PP+MAP (unlike SBP+DBP) has a monotonic relation with risk and may provide greater insight into hemodynamics of altered arterial stiffness versus impaired peripheral resistance but is not superior to SBP+DBP in predicting CVD events.
More Related Videos
07:51Hydra, a Computer-Based Platform for Aiding Clinicians in Cardiovascular Analysis and Diagnosis
Published on: September 26, 2018
06:04Pulse-Wave Velocity, Flow-Mediated Dilation, and Carotid Intima-Media Thickness to Assess Cardiovascular Risk in Population with Metabolic Syndrome
Published on: September 27, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Factors affecting Blood pressure
Physiological Factors:
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Assessment of the Cardiovascular System I: Subjective Data
Initial Enquiry
Ask the patient about their primary concern and thoroughly explore all reported symptoms.
Medical History
Investigate past illnesses affecting the cardiovascular system, such as angina, anemia, rheumatic fever, congenital heart disease, stroke, thrombophlebitis, dysrhythmias, varicosities
Inquire about symptoms...
Blood Studies for Cardiovascular System I: Cardiac Biomarkers
The essential diagnostic tools for detecting myocardial necrosis and monitoring individuals suspected of having acute coronary syndrome (ACS) include:
Troponins
Troponins, particularly cardiac troponins I and T, are the most precise and sensitive markers of myocardial injury. They are detectable within 4-6 hours of myocardial injury and remain...
Blood Studies for Cardiovascular System II: CRP, Hcy, and Cardiac Natriuretic Peptide Markers
These markers indicate stress or strain on the heart muscle:
Natriuretic Peptides (BNP)
Cardiac myocytes produce these hormones in response to ventricular stretching...
Hypertension III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies