Back

Association of hypotension with mortality among US adults: prospective cohort study

Han, Y.; Tang, J.; Wu, N.; Li, Z.; Cai, D.; Ren, H.; Hu, P.; Chen, Z.

2024-11-08 public and global health
10.1101/2024.11.08.24316952 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe associations of hypotension with mortality in general population remains incompletely understood. We aimed to investigate whether hypotension is associated with higher all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in this population. MethodsIn this prospective analysis, we utilized data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, 1999-2018), with mortality information linked until 2019. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the associations of different blood pressure (BP) with all-cause and CVD mortality. FindingsAmong the 37,832 participants, a total of 5261 deaths and 1664 deaths attributed to CVD causes were recorded over a median of 8.4 years of follow-up. The prevalence of hypotension was 7.6%. Both systolic BP and diastolic BP exhibited a J-shaped association with the all-cause and CVD mortality in restricted cubic spline modeling analysis (nonlinear-P <0.01). Compared to the normal BP group, the adjusted HRs for all-cause and CVD mortality in the hypotension group were 1.44 (1.20-1.74) and 1.57 (1.10-2.24), respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed that older individuals (age [&ge;]60 years) and those with obesity exhibited more pronounced HRs for all-cause mortality, with HRs of 1.60 (1.28-2.00) and 1.95 (1.45-2.61), respectively (P for interaction <0.05). InterpretationIn this nationally representative cohort of US adults, hypotension demonstrated a significant association with both all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality, particularly among elderly and obesity individuals. The findings underscore the significance of paying attention to and optimizing the management of hypotension in the general population.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.