The United Kingdom was among the first countries to introduce a salt reduction program in 2003 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence risk. Despite its initial success, the program has stalled recently and is yet to achieve national and international targets. We used age- and sex-stratified salt intake of 19 to 64 years old participants in the National Diet and Nutrition Surveys 2000 to 2018 and a multistate life table model to assess the effects of the voluntary dietary salt reduction program on premature CVD, quality-adjusted survival, and health care and social care costs in England. The program reduced population-level salt intake from 9.38 grams/day per adult (SE, 0.16) in 2000 to 8.38 grams/day per adult (SE, 0.17) in 2018. Compared with a scenario of persistent 2000 levels, assuming that the population-level salt intake is maintained at 2018 values, by 2050, the program is projected to avoid 83 140 (95% CI, 73 710–84 520) premature ischemic heart disease (IHD) cases and 110 730 (95% CI, 98 390–112 260) premature strokes, generating 542 850 (95% CI, 529 020–556 850) extra quality-adjusted life-years and £1640 million (95% CI, £1570–£1660) health care cost savings for the adult population of England. We also projected the gains of achieving the World Health Organization target of 5 grams/day per adult by 2030, which by 2050 would avert further 87 870 (95% CI, 82 050–88 470) premature IHD cases, 126 010 (95% CI, 118 600–126 460) premature strokes and achieve £1260 million (95% CI, £1180–£1260) extra health care savings compared with maintaining 2018 levels. Strengthening the salt reduction program to achieve further reductions in population salt intake and CVD burden should be a high priority.

The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association high blood pressure (BP) guidelines recommend risk assessment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to inform hypertension treatment in adults with elevated BP or low-risk stage I hypertension. The use of coronary artery calcium (CAC) score to guide hypertension therapy has not been adequately evaluated. Participants free of cardiovascular disease were pooled from Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults, and Jackson Heart Study. The risk for incident cardiovascular events (heart failure, stroke, coronary heart disease), by CAC status (CAC-0 or CAC>0) and BP treatment group was assessed using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. The 10-year number needed to treat to prevent a single cardiovascular event was also estimated. This study included 6461 participants (median age 53 years; 53.3% women; 32.3% Black participants). Over a median follow-up of 8.5 years, 347 incident cardiovascular events occurred. Compared with those with normal BP, the risk of incident cardiovascular event was higher among those with elevated BP/low-risk stage I hypertension and CAC>0 (hazard ratio, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.7–3.4]) and high-risk stage I/stage II hypertension (BP, 140–160/80–100 mm Hg) with CAC>0 (hazard ratio, 2.9 [95% CI, 2.1–4.0]). A similar pattern was evident across racial subgroups and for individual study outcomes. Among those with CAC-0, the 10-year number needed to treat was 160 for elevated BP/low-risk stage I hypertension and 44 for high-risk stage I or stage II hypertension (BP, 140–160/80–100 mm Hg). Among those with CAC>0, the 10-year number needed to treat was 36 and 22, respectively. Utilization of the CAC score may guide the initiation of hypertension therapy and preventive approaches to personalize cardiovascular risk reduction among individuals where the current guidelines do not recommend treatment.

Compared with brachial blood pressure (BP), central systolic BP (SBP) can provide a better indication of the hemodynamic strain inflicted on target organs, but it is unclear whether this translates into improved cardiovascular risk stratification. We aimed to assess which of central or brachial BP best predicts cardiovascular risk and to identify the central SBP threshold associated with increased risk of future cardiovascular events. This study included 13 461 participants of CARTaGENE with available central BP and follow-up data from administrative databases but without cardiovascular disease or antihypertensive medication. Central BP was estimated by radial artery tonometry, calibrated for brachial SBP and diastolic BP (type I), and a generalized transfer function (SphygmoCor). The outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events. Cox proportional-hazards models, differences in areas under the curves, net reclassification indices, and integrated discrimination indices were calculated. Youden index was used to identify SBP thresholds. Over a median follow-up of 8.75 years, 1327 major adverse cardiovascular events occurred. The differences in areas under the curves, net reclassification indices, and integrated discrimination indices were of 0.2% ([95% CI, 0.1–0.3] P<0.01), 0.11 ([95% CI, 0.03–0.20] P=0.01), and 0.0004 ([95% CI, −0.0001 to 0.0014] P=0.3), all likely not clinically significant. Central and brachial SBPs of 112 mm Hg (95% CI, 111.2–114.1) and 121 mm Hg (95% CI, 120.2–121.9) were identified as optimal BP thresholds. In conclusion, central BP measured with a type I device is statistically but likely not clinically superior to brachial BP in a general population without prior cardiovascular disease. Based on the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, the optimal type I central SBP appears to be 112 mm Hg.