The PAMELA (Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni) Study

Main Features and Results
  • Guido Grassi
  • Michele Bombelli
  • Roberto Sega
  • Fosca Quarti Trevano
  • Giovanni Corrao
  • Fabiana Madotto
  • Rita Facchetti
  • Miriam Fiore Panzeri
  • Giuseppe Mancia
Review Article
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

The PAMELA (Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni) study represents a major research project aimed at investigating the normality values, prognostic significance and relationships of ambulatory and home blood pressure with end-organ damage and metabolic alterations. This article reviews the background, rationale and main results of the various PAMELA studies published to date. These include studies focused on (i) the normal values of ambulatory and home blood pressure in different age decades; (ii) the relevance of the different blood pressures in predicting the occurrence of end-organ damage; (iii) the prognostic significance of ‘white-coat’ and ‘masked’ hypertension; (iv) the ‘power’ of different blood pressures in predicting cardiovascular and all-cause death; and (v) the main features of the blood pressure control in the population. Altogether, the findings reported in this review emphasise the clinical relevance of ambulatory and home blood pressure and the importance of obtaining information on different blood pressures both in treated and untreated hypertensive patients.

Key words

ambulatory blood pressure home blood pressure organ damage cardiovascular morbidity cardiovascular mortality metabolic syndrome blood pressure control 

References

  1. 1.
    Cesana G, De Vito G, Ferrario M, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure normalcy: the PAMELA study. J Hypertens Suppl 1991; 9(3): S17–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    WHO MONICA Project Principal Investigators. The World Health Organization Monica Project: a major international collaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 105–14Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Imai Y, Nagai K, Sakuma M, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure of adults in Ohasama, Japan. Hypertension 1993; 22: 900–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Staessen JA, Fagard R, Lijnen P, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure and blood pressure measured at home: progress report on a population study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994; 23Suppl. 5: S5–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mancia G, Sega R, Bravi C, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure normality: results from the PAMELA study. J Hypertens 1995; 13: 1377–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension. Guidelines for the management of hypertension. J Hypertens 1999;17:151–83Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guidelines Committee, European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology. Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens 2003; 21: 1011–53Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sega R, Cesana G, Milesi C, et al. Ambulatory and home blood pressure normality in the elderly: data from the PAMELA population. Hypertension 1997; 30: 1–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Agabiti-Rosei E, Trimarco B, Muiesan ML, et al. Cardiac structural and functional changes during long-term antihypertensive treatment with lacidipine and atenolol in the European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis (ELSA). J Hypertens 2005; 23: 1091–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mancia G, Zanchetti A, Agabiti-Rosei E, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure is superior to clinic blood pressure in predicting treatment-induced regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. SAMPLE Study Group. Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation. Circulation 1997; 95: 1464–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mancia G, Carugo S, Grassi G, et al. Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients without and with blood pressure control: data from the PAMELA population. Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni. Hypertension 2002; 39(3): 744–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sega R, Trocino G, Lanzarotti A, et al. Alterations of cardiac structure in patients with isolated office, ambulatory, or home hypertension: data from the general population (Pressione Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni [PAMELA] Study). Circulation 2001; 104(12): 1385–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sega R, Corrao G, Bombelli M, et al. Blood pressure variability and organ damage in a general population: results from the PAMELA study (Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni). Hypertension 2002; 39: 710–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mancia G, Bombelli M, Corrao G, et al. Metabolic syndrome in the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni (PAMELA) study: daily life blood pressure, cardiac damage, and prognosis. Hypertension 2007; 49: 40–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grassi G, Seravalle G, Mancia G. Left ventricular hypertrophy and sympathetic activity. Adv Exp Med Biol 1997; 432: 173–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bohric G, Chatellier G, Genes N, et al. Cardiovascular prognosis of ‘masked’ hypertension detected by blood pressure self-measurement in elderly treated hypertensive patients. JAMA 2004; 291: 1342–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mancia G, Zanchetti A. White-coat hypertension: misnomers, misconception and misunderstanding: what should we do next? J Hypertens 1996; 14: 1049–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mancia G, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, et al. Long-term risk of mortality associated with selective and combined elevation in office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure. Hypertension 2006; 47: 846–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mancia G, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, et al. Relationship of office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure to blood glucose and lipid variables in the PAMELA population. Hypertension 2005; 45: 1072–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kikuya M, Ohkubo T, Asayama K, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure and 10-year risk of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality: the Ohasama study. Hypertension 2005; 45: 240–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clement DL, De Buyzere ML, De Bacquer DA, et al. Prognostic value of ambulatory blood-pressure recordings in patients with treated hypertension. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 2407–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sega R, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, et al. 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: 1777–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mancia G, Bombelli M, Lanzarotti A, et al. Systolic vs diastolic blood pressure control in the hypertensive patients of the PAMELA population. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 582–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guido Grassi
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Michele Bombelli
    • 1
  • Roberto Sega
    • 1
  • Fosca Quarti Trevano
    • 1
  • Giovanni Corrao
    • 1
  • Fabiana Madotto
    • 1
  • Rita Facchetti
    • 1
  • Miriam Fiore Panzeri
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Mancia
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Clinica Medica and Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e PrevenzioneUniversità Milano-Bicocca, Ospedale San GerardoMonzaItaly
  2. 2.Centro Interuniversitario di Fisiologia Clinica e IpertensioneUniversità Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly
  3. 3.Centro Auxologico ItalianoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations