1. INTRODUCTION
A novel disease entity, call the systemic hemodynamic atherothrombotic syndrome (SHATS), has been proposed.1, 2, 3 It is considered imperative that clinicians recognize the synergistic relationship between exaggerated blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) and vascular damage, ultimately triggering cardiovascular disease (CVD) events (Figure 1).2 Even when average BP values are controlled, underlying BPV may mean that some patients with hypertension are at risk for target organ damage and cardiovascular events. This is particularly relevant in high‐risk patients with advanced vascular disease. We have recently also focused on the pathogenic mechanism of arterial stiffness as HATS (hemodynamic arteriosclerotic syndrome), separately from atherosclerosis.4 Aging, sympathetic activation, and cardiovascular risk factors accelerate HATS.
Figure 1.

Systemic hemodynamic atherothrombotic syndrome (SHATS). AI, augmentation index; BP, blood pressure; CAVI, cardio‐ankle vascular index; ECG, electrocardiography; Echo, echocardiography; FMD, flow‐medicated dilatation; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; NT‐proBNP, N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide; PWV, pulse wave velocity; UACR, urinary albumin/creatinine ratio
Until now, there has not been any consensus on how to diagnose SHATS or define its severity. This is important in the assessment of SHATS and development of an individualized, integrated strategy for CVD protection that targets BPV and vascular damage. Therefore, we have developed a SHATS score, based on the concept that both BP and vascular disease form part of a vicious cycle to accelerate organ damage and trigger CVD events in SHATS (Table 1).
Table 1.
Systemic hemodynamic atherothrombotic syndrome (SHATS) score
| Component | Score |
|---|---|
| A. BP score | Total 10 points |
| 1. Office BP | Maximum 2 points |
| Office SBP ≥ 140 mm Hg | 1 point |
| Office SBPV↑a | 1 point |
| 2. Home BP | Maximum 3 points |
| Home SBP↑(morning or evening ≥ 135 mm Hg, or nighttime* ≥120 mmHg | 2 points |
| Home SBPV↑b | 1 point |
| 3. ABPM** | Maximum 3 point |
| Ambulatory SBP↑ (daytime/morning ≥ 135 mm Hg, nighttime* ≥120 mm Hg, or 24‐h ≥ 130 mm Hg) | 2 points |
| Ambulatory SBPV↑c | 1 point |
| 4. Diurnal variation*** | Maximum 2 points |
| Riser pattern | 2 points |
| Extreme‐dipper pattern, or morning surge↑ | 1 point |
| 5. Atrial fibrillation | 5 points # |
| B. Vascular score | Total 10 points |
| 1. CVDd | Maximum 5 points |
| One CVD | 2 points |
| Two CVD | 4 points |
| Three or more CVD | 5 points |
| 2. Asymptomatic CVDe | Maximum 3 points |
| One abnormal finding | 1 point |
| Two abnormal findings | 2 points |
| Three or more abnormal findings | 3 points |
| 3. Microvascular disease | Maximum 2 points |
| Diabetes‐related CKD (albuminuria, eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) | 1 point |
| Small artery retinopathy | 1 point |
Abbreviations: ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SBPV, systolic blood pressure variability.
Defined as maximum SBP ≥ 180 mm Hg, visit‐to‐visit standard deviation [SD] ≥ 20 mm Hg, orthostatic change (increase or decrease) of ≥20 mm Hg (calculated as the change in BP from the resting sitting position [baseline] to the active standing position], or seasonal variation (SBP in winter minus SBP in summer) <0 mm Hg or ≥ 20 mm Hg.
Defined as maximum morning/evening SBP ≥ 180 mm Hg, maximum nighttime SBP ≥ 160 mm Hg, morning‐evening difference ≥ 20 mm Hg, or day‐by‐day coefficient of variation ≥ 6.1%, or seasonal variation (SBP in winter minus SBP in summer) <0 mm Hg or ≥9.1 mm Hg.
Defined as maximum daytime SBP ≥ 180 mm Hg, maximum nighttime SBP ≥ 160 mm Hg, or weighted SD ≥ 20 mm Hg.
CVD = stroke, coronary artery disease, heart failure, aortic stenosis, cognitive dysfunction, or peripheral arterial disease/aortic dissection.
Defined as: 1) pulse pressure ≥ 70 mmHg; 2) ankle‐brachial index ≤ 0.9 or ≥1.3 (or inter‐arm difference in SBP of ≥15 mm Hg); 3) cardio‐ankle vascular index (CAVI) ≥ 9 [or brachial‐ankle pulse wave velocity ≥ 18 m/s, or carotid‐femoral pulse wave velocity ≥ 10 m/s; 4) abnormal cardiac findings (left ventricular hypertrophy defined by ECG or echocardiography; or N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide [NT‐proBNP] level ≥ 125 pg/mL); 5) other specific abnormalities, such as flow‐mediated dilatation (FMD) of the brachial artery < 4%; maximum intima‐media thickness of the carotid artery ≥ 1.1 mm; peak systolic velocity of the renal artery ≥ 220 cm/s; white matter lesion, silent cerebral infarct, or microbleeds assessed by brain magnetic resonance imaging.
Nighttime SBP can be measured using ABPM or home BP monitoring.
When ABPM is not performed, the total score for ABPM and diurnal variation is 1.
Diurnal variation is assessed by ABPM.
When atrial fibrillation is present (score = 5), then SBPV scores and the diurnal variation score are 0.
The two components of the SHATS score are the BP score and the vascular score. The novelty of this concept is the synergistic, rather than additive, effects of BP and vascular disease in contributing to organ damage and CVD events. To reflect this, the BP and vascular scores are multiplied (rather than added) to calculate the SHATS score (an indication of SHATS severity). Another new feature is the inclusion of BPV measures in the BP score. The weight assigned to each component of the two scores is based on relative risks defined using existing literature as a reference. A Core Score is used to facilitate the diagnosis of SHATS.
2. BP SCORE
This includes systolic BP (SBP), systolic BPV and/or the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF) (Table 1). Both BP and BPV can be determined using office BP measurement or out‐of‐office measurement techniques (home BP monitoring [HBPM] and/or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring [ABPM]). The presence of AF is considered an extreme pattern of BPV; therefore, when AF is detected, all other BPV measures are assigned a score of 0.
2.1. Office BP
The pathological threshold of average office SBP is ≥140 mm Hg. We used maximum SBP, standard deviation (SD) of visit‐to‐visit systolic BPV across ≥5 readings, and orthostatic SBP change as measures of office BPV, all of which have been associated with cardiovascular risk independent of average office BP.1, 5, 6, 7 There is also significant seasonal variation in BP. Both BP and BPV are increased in the winter,8, 9, 10 and inverse and exaggerated seasonal BP variation increased the risk of CVD.11 Pathological thresholds are ≥180 mm Hg for maximum SBP, ≥20 mm Hg for SD of visit‐to‐visit systolic BPV, ≥20 mm Hg for orthostatic SBP change (increase or decrease by ≥20 mm Hg), and <0 mm Hg or ≥20 mm Hg for winter increase in SBP (SBP in winter minus SBP in summer; seasonal variation). Orthostatic BP change is calculated as the BP change when the patient moves from the resting sitting position (baseline) to the active standing position.
2.2. Home BP
The averaged home SBP level pathological threshold is ≥135 mm Hg. We used maximum SBP, morning‐evening (ME) difference, and coefficient of variation (CV) of day‐by‐day systolic BPV based on ≥5 readings as measures of home BPV. These have all been associated with organ damage and CVD event risk, independent of average home BP.12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Pathological thresholds are ≥180 mm Hg for maximum morning home SBP and maximum evening home SBP, ≥160 mm Hg for maximum nighttime home SBP, ≥20 mm Hg for ME difference, and 6.1% for CV of day‐by‐day home systolic BP,12 and <0 mm Hg or ≥9.1 mm Hg for winter increase in home SBP (SBP in winter minus SBP in summer; seasonal variation).11
2.3. ABPM
The pathological threshold of averaged ambulatory BP is ≥135 mm Hg for 24‐hour SBP. Ambulatory BPV measures used are maximum SBP and weighted SD of 24‐hour SBP readings. Short‐term ambulatory BPV has been associated with organ damage and CVD event risk independent of average ambulatory BP.17, 18, 19, 20 Pathological thresholds are ≥180 mm Hg for maximum daytime/morning ambulatory SBP, ≥160 mm Hg for maximum nighttime ambulatory SBP, and ≥20 mm Hg for the weighted SD of 24‐hour SBP.
Blood pressure parameters used to diagnose morning, daytime, and nocturnal hypertension are average morning, daytime, nighttime BP, respectively, regardless of office BP. Average home BP could be used instead of average daytime ambulatory BP, while nocturnal home BP could be used as alternative to nighttime BP evaluated by ABPM.21, 22 The patient is classified as having masked (uncontrolled) hypertension when office BP is <140/90 mm Hg.
2.4. Diurnal variation
The riser pattern (higher nighttime versus daytime SBP) is reported to be associated with the highest risk of CVD, independent of 24‐hour BP.23, 24, 25, 26 Other patterns that have been shown to increase cardiovascular risk include extreme‐dipper (excessive [≥20%] dipping of nocturnal BP) and exaggerated morning BP surge (morning SBP minus the lowest three SBP readings) of ≥35 mm Hg.26, 27, 28 Disrupted diurnal BP variation patterns, including those mentioned above, can be assessed using ABPM.
3. VASCULAR SCORE
The vascular score is based on the presence of clinically overt CVD, asymptomatic CVD, and/or microvessel disease. The number of overt CVD conditions (listed in the Table 1 footnote) is used to determine the CVD score, and the number of abnormal vascular test findings (listed in the Table 1 footnote) is used to calculate the asymptomatic CVD score. These abnormal findings have been associated with organ damage, future development of hypertension and CVD event risk.29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 The microvessel disease score includes the presence of diabetes‐related chronic kidney disease and/or small artery retinopathy.
4. SCORE CALCULATION
Blood pressure and vascular scores each have a possible score of 0‐10 points and are calculated separately. Total BP score and total vascular score are then multiplied the calculate the overall SHATS score (with possible scores of 0‐100, and higher scores indicating greater SHATS severity).
5. SHATS DIAGNOSIS
A wide range of BP and vascular measures are included to define SHATS severity. For diagnosis, the approach is simplified. This is based on the Core Score, which is calculated by multiplying scores for office BP and one of the 2 out‐of‐office BP measurements (HBPM and ABPM) with the score for either clinical CVD or asymptomatic (subclinical) vascular disease. SHATS is diagnosed when the SHATS Core Score is ≥5 points.
6. IN PRACTICE
As an example, when a patient has hypertension based on office BP (BP Score = 1) and morning home BP (BP Score = 2), with increased office and home BPV (BP Score = 2) plus a cardio‐ankle vascular index (CAVI) of ≥9.0 (vascular Score = 1), the SHATS Core Score would be 5 (2 + 2 + 1 [BP score] × 1 [vascular score]) and SHATS is diagnosed. If the patient had a vascular score of 0, then the SHATS Core Score would be 0 (2 + 2 + 1 [BP Score] × 0 [vascular score]) and the patient would not have SHATS. The severity of SHATS in this patient would be relatively low (total SHATS score 5 on a scale from 5 to 100).
7. CONCLUSIONS
This newly proposed SHATS score required validation in future studies. It is hoped that it will facilitate the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of this important entity, with the goal of improving BP control and outcomes, achieving precision medicine and personalized prevention of CVD, and, ultimately, contributing to the goal of zero cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension.
DISCLOSURES
None
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
K.Kario drafted the manuscript and approved the final submitted manuscript.
Kario K. Systemic hemodynamic atherothrombotic syndrome (SHATS): Diagnosis and severity assessment score. J Clin Hypertens. 2019;21:1011–1015. 10.1111/jch.13542
REFERENCES
- 1. Kario K. Orthostatic hypertension‐a new haemodynamic cardiovascular risk factor. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2013;9:726‐738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Kario K. Systemic hemodynamic atherothrombotic syndrome: a blind spot in the current management of hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2015;17:328‐331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Kario K. Prognosis in relation to blood pressure variability: pro side of the argument. Hypertension. 2015;65:1163–1169; discussion 69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Kario K. Hemodynamic arteriosclerotic syndrome ‐ a vicious cycle of hemodynamic stress and vascular disease. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018;20:1073–1077. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Muntner P, Whittle J, Lynch AI, et al. Visit‐to‐visit variability of blood pressure and coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and mortality: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:329–338. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Ohkuma T, Woodward M, Jun M, et al. Prognostic value of variability in systolic blood pressure related to vascular events and premature death in type 2 diabetes mellitus: the ADVANCE‐ON Study. Hypertension. 2017;70:461–468. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Rothwell PM, Howard SC, Dolan E, et al. Prognostic significance of visit‐to‐visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure, and episodic hypertension. Lancet. 2010;375:895–905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Kario K, Tomitani N, Kanegae H, et al. Development of a new ICT‐based multisensor blood pressure monitoring system for use in hemodynamic biomarker‐initiated anticipation medicine for cardiovascular disease: the National IMPACT Program project. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2017;60:435–449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Nishizawa M, Fujiwara T, Hoshide S, et al. Winter morning surge in blood pressure after the Great East Japan Earthquake. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019;21:208–216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Nishizawa M, Hoshide S, Okawara Y, Matsuo T, Kario K. Strict blood pressure control achieved using an ICT‐based home blood pressure monitoring system in a catastrophically damaged area after a disaster. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19:26–29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Hanazawa T, Asayama K, Watabe D, et al. Association between amplitude of seasonal variation in self‐measured home blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes: HOMED‐BP (Hypertension Objective Treatment Based on Measurement By Electrical Devices of Blood Pressure) Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e008509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Hoshide S, Yano Y, Mizuno H, Kanegae H, Kario K. Day‐by‐day variability of home blood pressure and incident cardiovascular disease in clinical practice: the J‐HOP Study (Japan Morning Surge‐Home Blood Pressure). Hypertension. 2018;71:177–184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Johansson JK, Niiranen TJ, Puukka PJ, Jula AM. Prognostic value of the variability in home‐measured blood pressure and heart rate: the Finn‐Home Study. Hypertension. 2012;59:212–218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Kikuya M, Ohkubo T, Metoki H, et al. Day‐by‐day variability of blood pressure and heart rate at home as a novel predictor of prognosis: the Ohasama study. Hypertension. 2008;52:1045–1050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Matsui Y, Ishikawa J, Eguchi K, Shibasaki S, Shimada K, Kario K. Maximum value of home blood pressure: a novel indicator of target organ damage in hypertension. Hypertension. 2011;57:1087–1093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Ushigome E, Matsumoto S, Oyabu C, et al. Prognostic significance of day‐by‐day variability of home blood pressure on progression to macroalbuminuria in patients with diabetes. J Hypertens. 2018;36:1068–1075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Cho N, Hoshide S, Nishizawa M, Fujiwara T, Kario K. Relationship between blood pressure variability and cognitive function in elderly patients with good blood pressure control. Am J Hypertens. 2018;31:293–298. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Chowdhury EK, Wing L, Jennings G, Beilin LJ, Reid CM. Visit‐to‐visit (long‐term) and ambulatory (short‐term) blood pressure variability to predict mortality in an elderly hypertensive population. J Hypertens. 2018;36:1059–1067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Filomena J, Riba‐Llena I, Vinyoles E, et al. Short‐term blood pressure variability relates to the presence of subclinical brain small vessel disease in primary hypertension. Hypertension. 2015;66:634–640; discussion 445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Stolarz‐Skrzypek K, Thijs L, Richart T, et al. Blood pressure variability in relation to outcome in the International Database of Ambulatory blood pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome. Hypertens Res. 2010;33:757–766. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Asayama K, Fujiwara T, Hoshide S, et al. Nocturnal blood pressure measured by home devices: evidence and perspective for clinical application. J Hypertens. 2019;37:905‐916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Kario K. Nocturnal hypertension: new technology and evidence. Hypertension. 2018;71:997–1009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Kario K, Pickering TG, Matsuo T, Hoshide S, Schwartz JE, Shimada K. Stroke prognosis and abnormal nocturnal blood pressure falls in older hypertensives. Hypertension. 2001;38:852–857. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Komori T, Eguchi K, Saito T, Hoshide S, Kario K. Riser pattern is a novel predictor of adverse events in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction. Circ J. 2017;81:220–226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. O'Brien E, Kario K, Staessen JA, de la Sierra A, Ohkubo T. Patterns of ambulatory blood pressure: clinical relevance and application. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018;20:1112–1115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Sogunuru GP, Kario K, Shin J, et al. Morning surge in blood pressure and blood pressure variability in Asia: evidence and statement from the HOPE Asia Network. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019;21:324‐334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Kario K, Pickering TG, Umeda Y, et al. Morning surge in blood pressure as a predictor of silent and clinical cerebrovascular disease in elderly hypertensives: a prospective study. Circulation. 2003;107:1401–1406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Li Y, Thijs L, Hansen TW, et al. Prognostic value of the morning blood pressure surge in 5645 subjects from 8 populations. Hypertension. 2010;55:1040–1048. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Kario K. Essential Manual on Perfect 24‐hour Blood Pressure Management from Morning to Nocturnal Hypertension: Up‐to‐date for Anticipation Medicine. Tokyo, Japan: Wiley Publishing Japan; 2018. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Kario K, Kanegae H, Oikawa T, Suzuki K. Hypertension is predicted by both large and small artery disease. Hypertension. 2019;73:75–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Tanaka A, Tomiyama H, Maruhashi T, et al. Physiological diagnostic criteria for vascular failure. Hypertension. 2018;72:1060–1071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Tomiyama H, Ohkuma T, Ninomiya T, et al. Steno‐stiffness approach for cardiovascular disease risk assessment in primary prevention. Hypertension. 2019;73(3):508‐513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Kokubo Y, Watanabe M, Higashiyama A, Nakao YM, Nakamura F, Miyamoto Y. Impact of intima-media thickness progression in the common carotid arteries on the risk of incident cardiovascular disease in the suita study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e007720. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Ohkuma T, Ninomiya T, Tomiyama H, et al. Ankle-brachial index measured by oscillometry is predictive for cardiovascular disease and premature death in the Japanese population: An individual participant data meta-analysis. Atherosclerosis. 2018;275:141–148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Matsushita K, Ding N, Kim ED, et al. Cardio‐ankle vascular index and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective and cross‐sectional studies. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019;21:16–24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
