Interest in the pathophysiology, measurement, and clinical implications of nocturnal blood pressure (BP) has significantly increased due to its strong association with cardiovascular risk, and its importance was recognized by the 2023 European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guidelines. Nocturnal BP regulation is complex and multifactorial, involving sleep-wake cycle, circadian rhythms, autonomic nervous system, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and renal mechanisms. 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is currently the reference method for nocturnal BP assessment. Home BP monitoring, with specially designed, validated devices with nocturnal BP measuring function, may also be used, while new cuffless and wearable technologies hold great potential but require further validation. Nocturnal BP phenotypes of clinical interest include nocturnal hypertension, increased nocturnal BP variability and altered day-night BP fluctuations. Among those, isolated nocturnal hypertension may be considered a type of masked hypertension. BP variability has prognostic relevance, as do the day-night BP changes, i.e. the nocturnal BP "dipping". Nocturnal hypertension and nondipping are particularly prevalent in individuals with autonomic neuropathies, sleep disorders (e.g., obstructive sleep apnoea), kidney disease, and metabolic or endocrine disorders, and are linked to hypertension mediated organ damage and cardiovascular risk. Therapeutic strategies targeting nocturnal BP remain debated. Chronotherapy (evening dosing of antihypertensives) has shown inconsistent results in clinical trials. Renal denervation and treatment of sleep-related breathing disorders may lower nocturnal BP and improve sleep quality. More research is needed to further clarify pathophysiology, measurement, therapeutic interventions, and overall management of nocturnal hypertension, issues on which this ESH position paper offers an in-depth review.

Nighttime blood pressure assessed by home monitors (HBP) appears to be a feasible and reliable alternative to ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring in adults. This study evaluated the optimal schedule for nighttime HBP monitoring in children and adolescents in terms of its agreement with nighttime ABP and association with preclinical target organ damage (TOD). Individuals aged 6-18 years referred for elevated blood pressure were evaluated with ABP (24 h) and HBP monitoring (daytime: 7 days, duplicate morning and evening measurements; night-time: 3 nights, 3 automated asleep measurements at 1-hour interval/night), as well as with determination of left ventricular mass index (LVMI), carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV). Forty-nine children with all 9 nighttime HBP measurements (3 nights) were analyzed [mean age 13.4 ± 2.7 (SD) years, males 51%]. By averaging an increasing number of nighttime systolic HBP readings, there was a consistent trend towards stronger association with nighttime ABP (correlation coefficients r increased from 0.65 to 0.81), and with TOD indices (for LVMI r increased from 0.21 to 0.30; cIMT from 0.38 to 0.57; PWV from 0.60 to 0.69). However, no further improvement in these associations was observed by averaging more than 4 nighttime readings. The diagnostic agreement between the 2 methods in detecting nocturnal hypertension was progressively improved by averaging more nighttime HBP readings, and reached a plateau at 4 measurements. Four nighttime home BP measurements, performed during at least 2 nights appear to be the minimum requirement for a reliable assessment of nighttime HBP in children and adolescents, regarding its agreement with ABP and association with TOD. HBP monitoring in children and adolescents constitutes an alluring alternative to ABP monitoring concerning nighttime BP measurements since it provides reasonable agreement with ABP measurements and similar association with target organ damage indices. The optimal nighttime HBP schedule requires at least 4 nighttime home BP measurements, performed during at least 2 nights, which is in line with similar studies in adults.

Cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement offers considerable potential for clinical practice but is a challenging technological field. Many are investigating pulse wave analysis with or without pulse arrival time in which machine learning is applied to pulsatile waveforms obtained with mobile devices (eg, wristbands, smartphones) to estimate BP. These methods generally require individual user calibration with cuff BP measurements or demographics (eg, age, sex). This calibration makes it difficult to evaluate the method's accuracy, and many studies claiming accuracy used inadequate testing procedures. Yet, publications and regulatory-cleared devices continue to rise, seemingly implying technological advancements. An update is provided on the flurry of activity in cuffless BP technologies over the last 2 to 3 years, covering the clinical need, the latest devices, recent publications based on pulse wave analysis and pulse arrival time, progress in developing validation standards for cuffless BP devices, and recent publications on other cuffless BP measurement principles. Despite the high volume of research and development, to date, there is no compelling evidence that pulse wave analysis and pulse arrival time can provide significant added value in BP measurement accuracy beyond the cuff BP or demographic data for calibration. Thus, it is reasonable to at least be skeptical of published and future studies on pulse wave analysis and pulse arrival time for cuffless BP measurement with uncertain testing procedures. It is important to focus on establishing robust validation standards for cuffless BP devices requiring individual user calibration and also pursuing cuffless and calibration-free BP measurement methodologies going forward.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, underscoring the importance of effective primary prevention strategies. Current total cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment tools, such as the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) in Europe and the Pooled cohort equations (PCEs) and Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) in the USA, aim to identify individuals at high CVD risk and guide clinical decision-making in the primary prevention setting. Statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events and is recommended as the first step for individuals with estimated CVD risk above specific thresholds. Moreover, the presence of risk modifiers, as well as the detection of asymptomatic atherosclerosis, reclassifies low-moderate CVD risk individuals into higher risk categories, contributing to tailored therapeutic decisions in primary prevention. However, differences in the performance of the available CVD risk assessment tools, the recommended thresholds for intervention, and the treatment targets by scientific societies introduce considerable inconsistency to the statin therapy practices. In addition, physicians' inertia and poor patients' adherence contribute to inadequate dyslipidemia control rates. This narrative review examines the available evidence on the current most used CVD risk assessment tools and the respective lipid-lowering recommendations, and highlights the role of targeted screening for asymptomatic atherosclerosis in terms of individualized therapy for primary prevention.

Hypertension is the leading modifiable risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF) and is estimated to be present in >70% of AF patients. This Frontiers Review was prepared by 29 expert members of the AF-SCREEN International Collaboration to summarize existing evidence and knowledge gaps on links between hypertension, AF, and their cardiovascular sequelae; simultaneous screening for hypertension and AF; and the prevention of AF through antihypertensive therapy. Hypertension and AF are inextricably connected. Both are easily diagnosed, often silent, and frequently treated inadequately. Together, they additively increase the risk of ischemic stroke, heart failure, and many types of dementia, resulting in greater all-cause mortality, considerable disease burden, and increased health care expenditures. Automated upper arm cuff blood pressure devices with implemented technology can be used to simultaneously detect both hypertension and AF. However, positive screening for AF with an oscillometric blood pressure monitor still requires ECG confirmation. The current evidence suggests that high-risk individuals aged ≥65 years or with treatment-resistant hypertension could benefit from AF screening. Since antihypertensive therapy effectively lowers AF risk, particularly in individuals with left ventricular dysfunction, hypertension should be the key target for AF prediction and prevention rather than merely a comorbidity of AF. Nevertheless, several important gaps in knowledge need to be filled over the next years, including the ideal method and selection of patients for simultaneous screening of hypertension and AF and the optimal antihypertensive drug class and blood pressure targets for AF prevention.

The optimal method for the diagnosis of hypertension among patients on hemodialysis remains a controversial issue. Using 44-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) as the reference-standard, we assessed the diagnostic performance of home BP monitoring (HBPM) versus routine dialysis-unit BP recordings in hemodialysis patients. Over a period of 2 weeks, the following methods were used for the assessment of hypertension: (i) routine predialysis and postdialysis BP recordings averaged over 6 consecutive dialysis sessions; (ii) HBPM for 7 days (duplicate morning and evening measurements, Microlife WatchBP Home N); (iii) 44-h ABPM (20-min intervals over an entire interdialytic interval, Microlife WatchBPO3). The study included 70 patients (mean age: 65.3 ± 13.2 years; treated hypertensives: 87.1%; 44-h ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP: 120.6 ± 15.2/66.3 ± 10.1 mmHg). Mean (standard deviation) of the differences between ambulatory daytime systolic BP (SBP) and routine predialysis SBP was -11.4 (13.4) mmHg, routine postdialysis SBP -4.0 (15.1) mmHg and home SBP -8.6 (10.7) mmHg. The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic-curve (AUC) for the detection of an ambulatory daytime SBP ≥ 135 mmHg was higher for home SBP [AUC: 0.934; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.871-0.996] relative to predialysis SBP (AUC: 0.778; 95% CI: 0.643-0.913) and postdialysis SBP (AUC: 0.766; 95% CI: 0.623-0.909) (P = 0.02 for both comparisons). Home SBP at the cut-off point of 141.0 mmHg provided the best combination of sensitivity (85.7%) and specificity (92.9%) in diagnosing hypertension. In conclusion, the present study shows that among hemodialysis patients, HBPM for 1 week is superior to 2-week averaged routine predialysis or postdialysis BP in predicting ambulatory hypertension.

Hypertension presents the largest modifiable public health challenge due to its high prevalence, its intimate relationship to cardiovascular diseases, and its complex pathogenesis and pathophysiology. Low awareness of blood pressure elevation and suboptimal hypertension diagnosis serve as the major hurdles in effective hypertension management. Advances in artificial intelligence in hypertension have permitted the integrative analysis of large data sets including omics, clinical (with novel sensor and wearable technologies), health-related, social, behavioral, and environmental sources, and hold transformative potential in achieving large-scale, data-driven approaches toward personalized diagnosis, treatment, and long-term management. However, although the emerging artificial intelligence science may advance the concept of precision hypertension in discovery, drug targeting and development, patient care, and management, its clinical adoption at scale today is lacking. Recognizing that clinical implementation of artificial intelligence-based solutions need evidence generation, this opinion statement examines a clinician-centric perspective of the state-of-art in using artificial intelligence in the management of hypertension and puts forward recommendations toward equitable precision hypertension care.

Blood pressure variability (BPV) predicts cardiovascular events independent of mean blood pressure. BPV is defined as short-term (24-h), medium or long- term (weeks, months or years). Standard deviation, coefficient of variation and variation independent of the mean have been used to quantify BPV. High BPV is associated with increasing age, diabetes, smoking and vascular disease and is a consequence of premature ageing of the vasculature. Long-term BPV has been incorporated into cardiovascular risk models (QRISK) and elevated BPV confers an increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes even in subjects with controlled blood pressure. Long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and thiazide diuretics are the only drugs that reduce BPV and for the former explains their beneficial effects on cardiovascular outcomes. We believe that BPV should be incorporated into blood pressure management guidelines and based on current evidence, long-acting dihydropyridines should be preferred drugs in subjects with elevated BPV.

Kiosk devices for unsupervised self-measurement of blood pressure (BP) are being used in public spaces and healthcare settings in several countries. This statement by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability provides a review of the published evidence on kiosk BP devices and consensus recommendations for their requirements and clinical use. A systematic literature search identified 54 relevant studies. Kiosk BP measurements appeared to be close to office BP [mean difference systolic 0.2 mmHg (95% confidence intervals -1.3 to 1.8); diastolic -0.4 mmHg (-3.5 to 2.7)], and higher than daytime ambulatory and home BP [mean difference 6.0 mmHg (1.6-10.4)/5.0 (2-8) and 8.1 mmHg (-2.6 to 18.9)/0.2 (-9.6 to 10.0), respectively]. Randomized or observational studies using kiosk BP measurements for hypertension screening or for assessing hypertension control were also included, as well as studies investigating users' and healthcare professionals' opinions, acceptability, and perspectives regarding kiosk BP measurements, and validation studies of kiosk BP devices. These studies had considerable heterogeneity in design, setting, methodology, measurement protocol, and sample size. Thus, at present, the clinical utility of kiosk BP measurements is uncertain. This ESH consensus statement acknowledges the potential of kiosk BP measurement as an emerging method for unsupervised self-measurement in the context of opportunistic screening for hypertension in apparently healthy people and the long-term monitoring of people with diagnosed hypertension. Requirements for the design, validation, function, and use of kiosk BP monitors are provided, together with the pending research questions on their optimal implementation in clinical practice.