Office blood pressure ‘time in target range’ is associated with an improvement in left ventricular mass index in patients with hypertension

Background. Time in target range (TTR) of blood pressure (BP) is a recently proposed and promising indicator of hypertension (HTN) control. According to several observational studies, TTR appears to have a stronger association with cardiovascular adverse events than snapshot achievement of target BP values. The left ventricular mass index (LVMI), reflecting structural cardiac remodeling, may serve as an additional surrogate endpoint for assessing the prognostic value of TTR.

Objective. To determine the presence and strength of the association between longer clinical systolic BP (SBP) TTR and the change in LVMI over 12 months in patients with initially uncontrolled hypertension.

Design and methods. This was a prospective, observational, single-center study involving patients of both sexes over the age of 18 with uncontrolled HTN (defined as receiving ≥ 1 antihypertensive medication) based on clinical BP measurements. The follow-up period was 12 months and included mandatory baseline, intermediate (3-month), and final visits for clinical BP assessment (3 visits total) and echocardiographic examinations (baseline and final visits). TTR was calculated using linear interpolation. Linear regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of ∆LVMI between the first and last visits.

Results. Seventy-six patients with both baseline and final echocardiographic data were included (19 women; mean age 46 years). At baseline, mean clinical SBP was 156 ± 16 mmHg, and mean LVMI was 120 ± 23 g/m². By the end of follow-up, both SBP and LVMI significantly decreased (∆24 ± 15 mmHg, p < 0,001 and ∆5,5 g/m² [95 % confidence interval (CI): 1,5 to 9,5], p  =  0,011). A total of 57 patients (75 %) achieved BP control. The mean TTR was 20,2 % (95 % CI: 13,3–27,0). Multiple linear regression analysis (adjusted R²  =  0,72) revealed that TTR (β  =  −0,167, p  =  0,021), higher baseline SBP (β  =  −0,428, p  =  0,028), and absence of active smoking (β  =  −11,67, p  =  0,029) were independent predictors of LVMI regression.

Conclusions. In high-risk patients with initially uncontrolled hypertension and no serious complications, significant reductions in clinical SBP and LVMI were observed over 12 months. A longer TTR was independently associated with LVMI regression, irrespective of other clinical parameters, particularly ∆SBP. These findings suggest that not just BP reduction, but sustained maintenance of BP within the target range is a key factor in reversing target organ damage.

1. Kalehoff JP, Oparil S. The story of the silent killer: a history of hypertension: its discovery, diagnosis, treatment, and debates. Curr Hypertens Rep 2020;22:72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-020-01077-7

2. Ionov MV, Zvartau NE, Konradi AO. First look at new 2018 joint ESH/ESC Guidelines on diagnosis and management of hypertension. Arterial’naya Gipertenziya = Arterial Hypertension. 2018;24(3):351–358. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18705/1607-419X-2018-24-3-351-358

3. Lim NK, Park HY, Kim WH, Mancia G, Cho MC. The U-shaped association between achieved blood pressure and risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in elderly and younger patients. J Hypertens. 2020;38(8):1559–1566. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000002434

4. Mancia G, Kreutz R, Brunström M, Grassi G. 2023 ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the european society of hypertension: endorsed by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) and the European Renal Association (ERA). J Hypertens 2023;41(12):1874–2071. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000003480

5. McEvoy JW, McCarthy CP, Bruno RM, Brouwers S, Canavan MD, Ceconi C, et al. 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension: Developed by the task force on the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and endorsed by the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) and the European Stroke Organization (ESO). Eur Heart J. 2024;45(38):3912–4018. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae178

6. Kobalava ZhD, Konradi AO, Nedogoda SV, Shlyakhto EV, Arutyunov GP, Baranova EI, et al. 2024 Clinical practice guidelines for Hypertension in adults. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2024;29(9):6117. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2024-6117

7. Schutte AE, Kollias A, Stergiou GS. Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2022;19(10):643–654. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-022-00690-0

8. Kario K. Blood pressure variability in hypertension: a possible cardiovascular risk factor. Am J Hypertens. 2004;17(11 Pt 1):1075–1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjhyper.2004.06.021

9. Doumas M, Tsioufis C, Fletcher R, Amdur R, Faselis C, Papademetriou V. Time in therapeutic range, as a determinant of allcause mortality in patients with hypertension. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e007131. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.007131

10. Fatani N, Dixon DL, Van Tassell B, Fanikos J, Buckley LF. Systolic blood pressure time in target range and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(10):1290–1299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.014

11. Wang H, Song J, Liu Z, Yu H, Wang K, Qin X, Wu Y. Time in target range for blood pressure and adverse health outcomes: а systematic review. Hypertension. 2025;82(3):419–431. https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.24013

12. Li W, Gnanenthiran SR, Schutte AE, Tan I. Blood pressure time at target and its prognostic value for cardiovascular outcomes: a scoping review. Hypertens Res. 2024;47(9):2337–2350. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-024-01798-1

13. Lauder L, Mahfoud F. Outcome data for renal denervation: craving the unattainable? Hypertens Res. 2024;47(10):2773–2775. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-024-01667-x

14. Kim HM, Hwang IC, Choi HM, Yoon YE, Cho GY. Prognostic implication of left ventricular hypertrophy regression after antihypertensive therapy in patients with hypertension. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:1082008. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.1082008

15. Mancini GBJ, Dahlöf B, Díez J. Surrogate markers for cardiovascular disease: structural markers. Circulation. 2004;109(4):22– 30. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000133443.77237.2f

16. Ionov MV, Zhukova OV, Zvartau NE, Kurapeev DI, YudinaYS, Konradi AO. Assessment of the clinical efficacy of telemonitoring and distant counseling in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Terapevticheskii Arkhiv. 2020;92(1):49–55. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26442/00403660.2020.01.000481

17. Ionov MV, YudinaYuS, Kurapeev DI, Zvartau NE, KonradiAO. Predictors of engagement and active participation of patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the telehealth surveillance program. Russian Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2024;27(12):37–43. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17116/profmed20242712137

18. Matskeplishvili ST, Saidova MA, Mironenko MYu, SafarovaAF, Pavlyukova EN, BoshchenkoAA, et al. Standard transthoracic echocardiography. Guidelines 2024. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2025;30(2):6271. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2025-6271

19. Schmitt L, Speckman J, Ansell J. Quality assessment of anticoagulation dose management: comparative evaluation of measures of time-in-therapeutic range. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2003;15(3):213– 216. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:THRO.0000011377.78585.63

20. Ionov M, Usova E, Egorov M, Zvartau N, Konradi A. Home blood pressure in target range as an additional therapeutic goal in hypertensive patients: a telemonitoring-based analysis. Connected Health. 2022;1:101–111. https://doi.org/10.20517/ch.2022.12

21. Rosendaal FR, Cannegieter SC, van der Meer FJ, Briët E. A method to determine the optimal intensity of oral anticoagulant therapy. Thromb Haemost. 1993;69:236–239.

22. Suplotova LA, Sudnitsyna AS, Romanova NV, Shestakova MV. Time in range is a tool for assessing the quality of glycemic control in diabetes. Diabetes mellitus. 2021;24(3):282–290. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14341/DM12703

23. Chung SC, Pujades-Rodriguez M, Duyx B, Denaxas SC, Pasea L, Hingorani A, et al. Time spent at blood pressure target and the risk of death and cardiovascular diseases. PLOS ONE. 2018;13:e0202359. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202359

24. Wang J, Li W, Man G, Liu Y, Wang S, Wu S. The impact of time in target range for systolic blood pressure on left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Hypertens. 2025;38(12):1068–1075. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpaf141

25. Movahed MR, Ramaraj R, Manrique C, Hashemzadeh M. Left ventricular hypertrophy is independently associated with allcause mortality. Am J Cardiovasc Dis. 2022;12:38–41.

26. Devereux RB, Wachtell K, Gerdts E, Boman K, Nieminen MS, Papademetriou V, et al. Prognostic significance of left ventricular mass change during treatment of hypertension. J Am Med Assoc. 2004;292(19):2350–2356. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.19.2350

27. Madden JM, O’Flynn AM, Fitzgerald AP, Kearney PM. Correlation between short-term blood pressure variability and left-ventricular mass index: a meta-analysis. Hypertens Res. 2016;39(3):171– 177. https://doi.org/10.1038/hr.2015.126

28. Messerli FH, Bangalore S, Schmieder RE. Wilder’s principle: pre-treatment value determines post-treatment response. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(9):576–579. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu467

29. Park SK, Ryoo JH, Kang JG, Jung JY. Smoking status, intensity of smoking, and their relation to left ventricular hypertrophy in working aged Korean men. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2021;23(7):1176–1182. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntab020