Systematic Review for the 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention,Detection, Evaluation,and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

Objective

To review the literature systematically and perform meta-analyses to address these questions: 1) Is there evidence that self-measured blood pressure (BP) without other augmentation is superior to office-based measurement of BP for achieving better BP control or for preventing adverse clinical outcomes that are related to elevated BP? 2) What is the optimal target for BP lowering during antihypertensive therapy in adults? 3) In adults with hypertension, how do various antihypertensive drug classes differ in their benefits and harms compared with each other as first-line therapy?

Medical Therapy for Systemic Right Ventricles: A Systematic Review (Part 1) for the 2018 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

Patients with systemic morphological right ventricles (RVs), including congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries and dextro-transposition of the great arteries with a Mustard or Senning atrial baffle repair, have a high likelihood of developing systemic ventricular dysfunction. Unfortunately, there are a limited number of clinical studies on the efficacy of medical therapy for systemic RV dysfunction.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), beta blockers, and aldosterone antagonists in adults with systemic RVs. The inclusion criteria included age ≥18 years, systemic RVs, and at least 3 months of treatment with ACE inhibitor, ARB, beta blocker, or aldosterone antagonist. The outcomes included RV end-diastolic and end-systolic dimensions, RV ejection fraction, functional class, and exercise capacity. EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases were searched. The selected data were pooled and analyzed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran’s Q test. A Bayesian meta-analysis model was also used in the event that heterogeneity was low. Bias assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and statistical risk of bias was assessed with Begg and Mazumdar’s test and Egger’s test.Six studies met the inclusion criteria, contributing a total of 187 patients; treatment with beta blocker was the intervention that could not be analyzed because of the small number of patients and diversity of outcomes reported. After at least 3 months of treatment with ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or aldosterone antagonists, there was no statistically significant change in mean ejection fraction, ventricular dimensions, or peak ventilatory equivalent of oxygen. The methodological quality of the majority of included studies was low, mainly because of a lack of a randomized and controlled design, small sample size, and incomplete follow-up.In conclusion, pooled results across the limited available studies did not provide conclusive evidence with regard to a beneficial effect of medical therapy in adults with systemic RV dysfunction. Randomized controlled trials or comparative-effectiveness studies that are sufficiently powered to demonstrate effect are needed to elucidate the efficacy of ACE inhibitors, ARBs, beta blockers, and aldosterone antagonists in patients with systemic RVs.     

Potential U.S. Population Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA High Blood Pressure Guideline

Background

The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults provides recommendations for the definition of hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) thresholds for initiation of antihypertensive medication, and BP target goals.

Are the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for exercise testing for suspected coronary artery disease correct?

BACKGROUND: Recently published American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines state that patients with suspected coronary disease and an intermediate pretest probability are appropriate candidates for exercise ECG, while those with low or high pretest probability are not. METHODS: From 5,103 consecutive patients with symptoms of suspected coronary disease, we evaluated 872 patients who underwent coronary angiography following exercise ECG. Differences in test performance were determined using receiver operating characteristic curve area analysis. A score using age, gender, symptoms, and risk factors was used to classify patients into low, intermediate, and high pretest probability groups. RESULTS: When patients with inadequate exercise tests were excluded, overall sensitivity and specificity were 70% and 66%, respectively. Only the intermediate pretest probability group demonstrated significant incremental value: pretest vs posttest intermediate, 70 +/- 3 vs 79 +/- 3 (p < 0.0001); low, 71 +/- 6 vs 76 +/- 7 (p = 0.39); and high, 69 +/- 8 vs 75 +/- 7 (p = 0.12). From the low- to the high-probability groups, there was a progressive increase in positive predictive value (21%, 62%, and 92%) and decrease in negative predictive value (94%, 72%, and 28%), respectively. The frequencies of abnormal exercise ECGs were lower in the unselected groups compared with the angiography groups (low, 13% vs 36%; intermediate, 22% vs 53%; high, 36% vs 63%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the information added by exercise testing to clinical data, these results confirm the ACC/AHA guideline assignments for test selection. However, despite these guidelines, patients with a low pretest probability can be selected for exercise testing with the knowledge that a positive result is infrequent and a negative result carries a very high negative predictive value. Intermediate-probability patients on average carry a significant false-negative rate, suggesting that exercise ECG alone may not be a sufficient screening test in all intermediate-probability patients. Because of poor negative predictive value and a large percentage of negative tests, high-probability patients should undergo coronary angiography as the initial strategy, unless the goal of exercise testing is to assess prognosis.     

Are the American College of Cardiology/Emergency Cardiac Care (ACC/ECC) guidelines useful in triaging patients to telemetry units?

PURPOSE: To determine if the ACC/ECC guidelines (1991) properly stratify patients according to risk of arrhythmia, defined as a single event on cardiac monitoring, and benefit, defined as a subsequent management change from a recorded telemetry event. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In 2003, a prospective study of 217 consecutive patients admitted to a 24-bed telemetry unit was conducted for 25 days at a major academic hospital. Patients were categorized per ACC/ECC guidelines as appropriate (class I & II) or inappropriate (class III) based on a non-cardiologist admission diagnosis. A cardiologist-led group then reclassified patients at the time of admission using a brief interview. Continuous telemetry-recorded arrhythmias and resultant management changes were reviewed and recorded daily. Subgroup analysis of patients admitted with a chief complaint of chest pain was also performed. In 2004, after this trial was performed, the American Heart Association released a scientific statement updating practice standards for ECG monitor; however, this paper is based upon the original 1991 ACC/ECC guidelines. RESULTS: Reclassification significantly decreased the percentage of all class I & II patients from 91% to 71% (P<0.001) and the percentage of class I & II patients with chest pain from 100% to 58% (P<0.001) without increasing the percentage of arrhythmias occurring in class III patients. Class II patients had a statistically significant higher percentage of arrhythmias than class I and III patients before and after reclassification (P<0.001 and P<0.001, respectively). Management changes occurring as a direct result of telemetry events were higher in class II than class I or III patients before and after reclassification (P = 0.01 and P = 0.03). Life-threatening arrhythmias (sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation) occurred in 1% of the 216 patients enrolled in this study. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Cardiology input using ACC/ECC guidelines and a brief interview at admission safely reduced total admissions primarily by identifying low risk chest pain admissions inappropriate for inpatient telemetry monitoring. (2) Life threatening arrhythmias occurring in patients admitted to telemetry are rare.