Abstract Background Exaggerated orthostatic changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) were associated with adverse cardiovascular events. However, the predictive role of SBP hyperactivity to standing on incident atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. Purpose We aim to assess the association between orthostatic SBP changes and incident AF. Methods We performed a post hoc analysis of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a randomized controlled trial comparing intensive (<120 mm Hg) and standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP interventions in participants with hypertension. Participants with standing SBP <110 mm Hg were not eligible for randomization according to the SPRINT protocol. Participants without AF who had seated and standing SBP measurements at baseline and available baseline or follow-up ECG were included in this analysis. Orthostatic SBP changes were defined as standing SBP minus seated SBP. Patients were grouped into tertiles of orthostatic SBP changes. AF was ascertained from the standard 12-lead ECG obtained at baseline, year 2, year 4, a close-out visit, and any visit when suspected of serious adverse events. We used Cox proportional regression models and restricted spline curves to assess the association of orthostatic SBP changes with incident AF. Results Among 8,455 participants included in this analysis, 327 incident AF cases occurred during follow-up. The restricted spline curve depicted a U-shaped relationship between orthostatic SBP changes and incident AF in the unadjusted model (P for nonlinearity = 0.012) (Figure 1). After adjusting for age, female, race, smoking, alcohol use, history of cardiovascular disease, history of chronic kidney disease, and body mass index, a SBP increase ≥ 6 mm Hg to standing was independently associated with a 43% higher risk of incident AF (HR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.07-1.90; P = 0.014) compared to nonsignificant orthostatic SBP changes (>-4 mm Hg to <6 mm Hg). A SBP decrease ≥ 4 mm Hg to standing showed a nonsignificant higher risk of developing AF compared to SBP changes of >-4 mm Hg to <6 mm Hg (Figure 2). In subgroup analysis, the results presented a similar tendency to the main result. Sensitivity analyses also generated consistent results while additionally adjusting for seated and standing blood pressure or heart rate. Conclusion In this post hoc analysis of the SPRINT trial, exaggerated SBP increase to standing independently predicts incident AF.Figure 1Figure 2