Acupuncture for patients with mild hypertension: A randomized controlled trial

Acupuncture may be beneficial for patients with mild hypertension, but the evidence is not convincing. We aimed to examine the effect of acupuncture on blood pressure (BP) reduction in patients with mild hypertension. We conducted a multicenter, single‐blind, sham‐controlled, randomized trial in eleven hospitals in China. The trial included 428 patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP) from 140 to 159 mm Hg and/or with diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from 90 to 99 mm Hg. The patients were randomly assigned to receive 18 sessions of affected meridian acupuncture (n = 107) or non‐affected meridian acupuncture (n = 107) or sham acupuncture (n = 107) during 6 weeks, or to stay in a waiting‐list control (n = 107). All patients received 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring at weeks 6, 9, and 12. We included 415 participants in the intention‐to‐treat analysis. The two acupuncture groups were pooled in the analysis, since they had no difference in all outcomes. SBP decreased at week 6 in acupuncture group vs sham acupuncture vs waiting‐list group (7.2 ± 11.0 mm Hg vs 4.1 ± 11.5 mm Hg vs 4.1 ± 13.2 mm Hg); acupuncture was not superior to sham acupuncture (mean difference 2.7 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.4 to 5.9, adjusted P = 0.103) or waiting‐list control (2.9 mm Hg, 95% CI −0.2 to 6.0, adjusted P = 0.078). However, acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture (3.3 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.2 to 6.3, adjusted P = 0.035) and waiting‐list control (4.8 mm Hg, 95% CI 1.8 to 7.8, P < 0.001) at week 9. Acupuncture had a small effect size on the reduction of BP in patients with mild hypertension.     

Single‐pill combination of cilnidipine,an L‐/N‐type calcium channel blocker,and valsartan effectively reduces home pulse pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension and sympathetic hyperactivity: The HOPE‐Combi survey

The home blood pressure (BP) control by a single‐pill combination of cilnidipine (an L‐/N‐type calcium channel blocker; CCB) and valsartan (HOPE‐Combi) survey is a multicenter, post‐marketing, prospective observational study of a single‐pill combination of cilnidipine 10 mg and valsartan 80 mg (SPC of Cil/Val) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. We examined the effects of the SPC of Cil/Val on morning home systolic BP (MHSBP) and morning home pulse pressure (MHPP) of 1036 patients with hypertension over 12 months. MHSBP decreased by 14.0 mm Hg (P < .01), and MHPP decreased by 6.6 mm Hg (P < .01). Moreover, morning home pulse rate (MHPR) decreased by 2.1 bpm (P < .01). A more progressive and greater decrease in MHSBP (−17.2 vs −10.3 mm Hg, P < .01) and MHPP (−7.6 vs −4.9 mm Hg, P < .01) was observed in patients with higher MHPR (≥70 bpm) than in those with lower MHPR (<70 bpm) over the treatment period. In particular, in patients with a wide MHPP (≥70 mm Hg), the difference in the MHPP reduction was greater in patients with higher MHPR than in those with lower MHPR (−17.9 vs −13.6 mm Hg, P < .01). These results suggested that the SPC of Cil/Val, which possesses the unique sympatholytic characteristics of an L‐/N‐type CCB, was particularly effective in patients with uncontrolled hypertension and sympathetic hyperactivity.     

Poor sleep quality is associated with cardiac autonomic dysfunction in treated hypertensive men

Hypertensives present cardiac autonomic dysfunction. Reduction in sleep quality increases blood pressure (BP) and favors hypertension development. Previous studies suggested a relationship between cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction and sleep quality, but it is unclear whether this association is present in hypertensives. Thus, this study evaluated the relationship between sleep quality and cardiac autonomic modulation in hypertensives. Forty‐seven middle‐aged hypertensive men under consistent anti‐hypertensive treatment were assessed for sleep quality by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI—higher score means worse sleep quality). Additionally, their beat‐by‐beat BP and heart rate (HR) were recorded, and cardiac autonomic modulation was assessed by their variabilities. Mann‐Whitney and t tests were used to compare different sleep quality groups: poor (PSQI > 5, n = 24) vs good (PSQI ≤ 5, n = 23), and Spearman’s correlations to investigate associations between sleep quality and autonomic markers. Patients with poor sleep quality presented lower cardiac parasympathetic modulation (HR high‐frequency band = 26 ± 13 vs 36 ± 15 nu, P = .03; HR total variance = 951 ± 1373 vs 1608 ± 2272 ms², P = .05) and cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (4.5 ± 2.3 vs 7.1 ± 3.7 ms/mm Hg, P = .01). Additionally, sleep quality score presented significant positive correlation with HR (r = +0.34, P = .02) and negative correlations with HR high‐frequency band (r = −0.34, P = .03), HR total variance (r = −0.35, P = .02), and cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (r = −0.42, P = .01), showing that poor sleep quality is associated with higher HR and lower cardiac parasympathetic modulation and baroreflex sensitivity. In conclusion, in treated hypertensive men, poor sleep quality is associated with cardiac autonomic dysfunction.     

A randomized,double‐blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed‐dose combination of amlodipine/rosuvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension

This multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group phase III clinical trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a rosuvastatin + amlodipine combination compared with that of rosuvastatin or amlodipine monotherapy in hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia. A total of 106 patients of 15 institutions in Korea were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg, amlodipine 10 mg, or rosuvastatin 20 mg. After 8 weeks of treatment, the mean ± SD of change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) was −22.82 ± 12.99 mm Hg in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. The percentage of patients whose msSBP decreased ≥20 mm Hg or msDBP decreased ≥10 mm Hg was also highest in this group (74.29%). The mean ± SD percentage change in low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) level from baseline after 8 weeks was −52.53% ± 11.21% in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. More patients in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group achieved their target LDL‐C goal at 8 weeks, compared with the other treatment groups (97.14%). No serious adverse events or adverse drug reactions were observed in all groups. In hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia, combination treatment with rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg effectively reduced blood pressure and LDL‐C levels while maintaining safety.     

Association of betaine with blood pressure in dialysis patients

Mechanisms underlying elevated blood pressure in dialysis patients are complex as a variety of non‐traditional factors are involved. We sought to explore the association of circulating betaine, a compound widely distributed in food, with blood pressure in dialysis patients. We used baseline data of an ongoing cohort study involving patients on hemodialysis. Plasma betaine was measured by high performance liquid chromatography in 327 subjects. Blood pressure level was determined by intradialytic ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The mean age of the patients was 52.6 ± 11.9 years, and 58.4% were male. Average interdialytic ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 138.4 ± 22.7 mm Hg and 84.4 ± 12.5 mm Hg, respectively. Mean plasma betaine level was 37.6 μmol/L. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed significant associations of betaine with both systolic blood pressure (β = −3.66, P = .003) and diastolic blood pressure (β = −2.00, P = .004). The associations persisted even after extensive adjustment for cardiovascular covariates. Subgroup analysis revealed that the association between betaine and blood pressure was mainly limited to female patients. Our data suggest that alteration of circulating betaine possibly contributes to blood pressure regulation in these patients.     

Blood pressure responses to hypertension treatment and trends in cognitive function in patients with initially difficult-to-treat hypertension: a retrospective subgroup analysis of the Observational Study on Cognitive Function and SBP Reduction (OSCAR) study

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:78–84. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.The Observational Study on Cognitive Function and SBP Reduction (OSCAR) provided opportunities to examine the influence of eprosartan on trends in cognitive performance in a large population of patients with difficult‐to‐treat hypertension (DTTH). A total of 4649 patients diagnosed retrospectively with DTTH, defined as systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) ≥140/90 mm Hg despite use of at least 3 antihypertensive drugs during the month preceding the baseline visit comprised the intention‐to‐treat (ITT) cohort. The patients were given eprosartan‐based antihypertension therapy (EBT; 600 mg/d). Blood pressure and cognitive function parameters included significant (P<.001) differences for DTTH vs non‐DTTH patients such as older age, body mass index, SBP and pulse pressure (PP), and lower Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. After EBT for 6 months, SBP/DBP in DTTH was 138.8±12.2/81.9±7.4 (ΔSBP−26±15.7; ΔDBP−11.4±9.8); PP was 57.0±10.8 (ΔPP−14.5±13.8) (all P<.001 vs baseline and non‐DTTH group). A total of 2576 patients (87.4%) responded to EBT (ie, SBP <140 mm Hg and/or ΔSBP ≥15 mm Hg, or DBP <90 mm Hg and/or ΔDBP ≥10 mm Hg); 1426 DTTH patients (48.4%) achieved normalized SBP/DBP (ie, SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg). ΔPP in DTTH‐isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) was −18.0±13.3 mm Hg (P=.003 vs DTTH‐systolic‐diastolic hypertension). End‐of‐EBT mean MMSE was 27.5±3.0 (P<.001 vs baseline). Blood pressure responses after EBT coincided with stabilization/improvement of MMSE in this retrospective investigation in DTTH patients. The average improvement in MMSE in DTTH patients was similar to that in non‐DTTH patients. EBT effects on PP may be relevant to the evolution of MMSE in DTTH‐ISH patients.

The Observational Study on Cognitive Function and SBP Reduction (OSCAR) was designed to examine the safety and tolerability of once‐daily therapy with eprosartan in a very large community‐dwelling population of patients with arterial hypertension recruited in 28 countries and managed in routine primary care. This study provided opportunities to examine the influence of the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) eprosartan on trends in cognitive performance in a large population of patients with high blood pressure (BP).The principal findings of OSCAR have been reported previously. ¹ A 6‐month period of antihypertensive therapy based on eprosartan was associated with a significant reduction in mean systolic BP (SBP) and a significant improvement in mean Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (P<.0001 for both outcomes). In multiple linear regression, cognitive decline was demonstrated to be independently and inversely correlated with SBP reduction (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73–0.82).The intention‐to‐treat (ITT) cohort of OSCAR comprised 25,745 adult patients with hypertension. This large number of patients enabled us to identify several large subgroups for further investigation, with the intention of adding to what are still sometimes limited epidemiologic data on specific types of patients.Recent revisions to extant European hypertension guidelines and first reports of new treatment options for this condition ² , ³ , ⁴ are indications that resistant hypertension is a pressing clinical priority. Poorly controlled high BP may be a factor in cognitive decline in older patients. Observations from several thousand patients in a real‐world survey may be instructive for the better management of this condition. Accordingly, we report here our findings in a retrospectively identified cohort of almost 3000 patients from the OSCAR population classified as having difficult‐to‐treat hypertension (DTTH) at baseline.     

Feasibility of catheter ablation renal denervation in “mild” resistant hypertension

Renal denervation (RDN) has been proposed as a novel interventional antihypertensive technique. However, existing evidence was mainly from patients with severe resistant hypertension. The authors aimed to evaluate the efficacy of RDN in patients with resistant hypertension with mildly elevated blood pressure (BP). Studies of RDN in patients with mild resistant hypertension (systolic office BP 140–160 mm Hg despite treatment with three antihypertensive drugs including one diuretic, or mean systolic BP by 24‐hour ambulatory BP measurement [ABPM] 135–150 mm Hg) were included. Two observational and one randomized cohort were identified (109 patients in the RDN group and 36 patients in the control group). Overall, the mean age of patients was 62±10 years, and 69.7% were male. Before‐after comparison showed that RDN significantly reduced ABPM as compared with the baseline systolic ABPM, from 146.3±13 mm Hg at baseline to 134.6±14.7 mm Hg at 6‐month follow‐up and diastolic ABPM from 80.8±9.4 mm Hg at baseline to 75.5±9.8 mm Hg at 6‐month follow up (both P<.001). This significant effect was not observed in the control group. Between‐group comparison showed a greater change in ABPM in the RDN group as compared with that in the control group (change in systolic ABPM: −11.7±9.9 mm Hg in RDN vs −3.5±9.6 mm Hg in controls [P<.001]; change in diastolic ABPM: −5.3±6.3 mm Hg in RDN vs −2.1±5.5 mm Hg in control [P=.007]). RDN was also associated with a significantly decreased office systolic/diastolic BP and reduced number of antihypertensive medications. No severe adverse events were found during follow‐up. RDN seems feasible to treat patients with mild resistant hypertension.     

Efficacy and safety of renal denervation for the management of arterial hypertension: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized,sham‐controlled,catheter‐based trials

Despite the availability of a numerous antihypertensive agents, hypertension treatment and control rates remain low in many countries. The role of the sympathetic nervous system has long been recognized, but recent sham control renal denervation studies demonstrated conflicting results. In this reviewe paper, the authors performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to examine outcomes of sham‐controlled studies utilizing new technologies and procedures. Six published randomized, sham‐controlled studies were included in this meta‐analysis. Of those, three trials used the first‐generation radiofrequency renal denervation device and technique and the other three used second‐generation devices and techniques. In total, 981 patients with hypertension were randomized in all 6 trials to undergo renal denervation (n = 585) or sham procedure (n = 396). Overall, renal denervation resulted in a decrease of 24‐hours systolic ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) by 3.62 mm Hg (95% CI: −5.28‐−1.96; I² = 0%), compared to sham procedure (GRADE: low). Renal denervation also reduced daytime systolic ABP by 5.51 mm Hg (95% CI: −7.79‐−3.23; I² = 0%), compared to sham procedure but not nighttime systolic ABP. Office systolic blood pressure was reduced by 5.47 mm Hg (95% CI −8.10‐−2.84; I² = 0%), compared to sham control. Further analysis demonstrated that second‐generation devices were effective in reducing blood pressure, whereas the first‐generation devices were not. These results indicate that effective renal denervation can result in significant and clinically meaningful blood pressure reduction. The second‐generation devices provide better renal nerve ablation.     

The effectiveness of aerobic exercise for hypertensive population: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different durations of aerobic exercise on hypertensive patients. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched from their inception until July 2018. English publications and randomized controlled trials involving aerobic exercise treatment for hypertensive population were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. The Cochrane''s Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. In this systematic review, a total of 14 articles were included, involving 860 participants. The quality of the included studies ranged from moderate to high. The results of the meta‐analysis showed that compared with the control group, significant effects of aerobic exercise were observed on reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) (mean difference [MD] = −12.26 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −15.17 to −9.34, P < 0.05), diastolic blood pressure (DBP; MD = −6.12 mm Hg, 95% CI = −7.76 to −4.48, P < 0.05), and heart rate (MD = −4.96 bpm, 95% CI = −6.46 to −3.43, P < 0.05). In addition, significant reductions were observed in ambulatory DBP (MD = −4.90 mm Hg, 95% CI = −8.55 to −1.25, P < 0.05) and ambulatory SBP (MD = −8.77mm Hg, 95% CI = −13.97 to −3.57, P < 0.05). Therefore, aerobic exercise might be an effective treatment for blood pressure improvement in hypertensive patients. However, the effectiveness between the duration of different treatment needs to be well‐designed and rigorous studies will be required to verify the dataset.     

Unattended versus attended automated office blood pressure: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies using the same methodology for both methods

There is increasing interest in unattended automated office blood pressure (OBP) measurement, which gives lower blood pressure values than the conventional auscultatory OBP. Whether unattended automated OBP differs from standardized attended automated OBP performed using the same device and measurement protocol remains uncertain. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies (aggregate data) comparing unattended vs attended automated OBP using the same device and measurement protocol (conditions, number of measurements, visits) was performed. Ten eligible studies (n = 1004, weighted age 60.8 ± 4.2 [SD] years, 55% males) were analyzed. Unattended OBP (pooled systolic/diastolic 133.9 [95% CI: 129.7, 138]/80.6 [95% CI: 77, 84.2] mm Hg) did not differ from attended OBP (135.3 [95% CI: 130.9, 139.6]/81 [95% CI: 77.6, 84.3] mm Hg); pooled systolic OBP difference −1.3, 95% CI: −4.3, 1.7 mm Hg and diastolic −0.4, 95% CI: −1.2, 0.3 mm Hg. Nine of ten studies achieved high quality score and no publication bias was identified. Meta‐regression analysis did not reveal any effect of age, gender, or attended systolic OBP on the unattended‐attended systolic OBP difference (P = NS for all). However, there was a trend toward higher attended than unattended OBP at higher OBP levels. These data suggest that, when the same device and measurement protocol are used, attended automated OBP provides similar blood pressure values as unattended automated OBP. Although unattended automated OBP is theoretically advantageous as it ensures that standardized conditions and measurement protocol are used, attended automated OBP, if carefully performed, appears to be a reasonable and practical alternative.     

A randomized multicenter study on ambulatory blood pressure and arterial stiffness in patients treated with valsartan/amlodipine or nifedipine GITS

In a pre‐specified subgroup analysis of a 12‐week randomized multicenter study, we investigated effects of valsartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg single‐pill combination (n = 75) and nifedipine GITS 30 mg (n = 75) on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness assessed by brachial‐ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. At week 12, the between‐treatment mean differences in systolic/diastolic BP were smaller for 24‐hour and daytime (–2.1/–1.7 and −2.0/−1.5 mm Hg, respectively, P ≥ 0.22) but greater (P < 0.01) for nighttime (–4.0/‐2.8 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.09), especially in sustained uncontrolled hypertension (−5.0/−4.1 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.04) and non‐dippers (−6.5/−3.7 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.07), in favor of valsartan/amlodipine. At week 12, PWV was significantly reduced from baseline by valsartan/amlodipine (n = 59, P < 0.0001) but not nifedipine (n = 59, P = 0.06). The changes in PWV were significantly associated with that in ambulatory systolic BP and pulse pressure in the nifedipine (P ≤ 0.0008) but not valsartan/amlodipine group (P ≥ 0.57), with a significant interaction (P ≤ 0.045). The valsartan/amlodipine combination was more efficacious than nifedipine GITS in lowering nighttime BP in sustained uncontrolled hypertension and non‐dippers, and in lowering arterial stiffness independent of BP lowering.     

Organ damage changes in patients with resistant hypertension randomized to renal denervation or spironolactone: The DENERVHTA (Denervación en Hipertensión Arterial) study

Renal denervation and spironolactone have both been proposed for the treatment of resistant hypertension, but their effects on preclinical target organ damage have not been compared. Twenty‐four patients with 24‐hour systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg despite receiving three or more full‐dose antihypertensive drugs, one a diuretic, were randomized to receive spironolactone or renal denervation. Changes in 24‐hour blood pressure, urine albumin excretion, arterial stiffness, carotid intima‐media thickness, and left ventricular mass index were evaluated at 6 months. Mean baseline‐adjusted difference between the two groups (spironolactone vs renal denervation) at 6 months in 24‐hour systolic blood pressure was −17.9 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], −30.9 to −4.9; P = .01). Mean baseline‐adjusted change in urine albumin excretion was −87.2 (95% CI, −164.5 to −9.9) and −23.8 (95% CI, −104.5 to 56.9), respectively (P = .028). Mean baseline‐adjusted variation of 24‐hour pulse pressure was −13.5 (95% CI, −18.8 to −8.2) and −2.1 (95% CI, −7.9 to 3.7), respectively (P = .006). The correlation of change in 24‐hour systolic blood pressure with change in log‐transformed urine albumin excretion was r = .713 (P < .001). At 6 months there was a reduction in albuminuria in patients with resistant hypertension treated with spironolactone as compared with renal denervation.     

Pulse wave velocity progression over a medium‐term follow‐up in hypertensives: Focus on uric acid

The role of uric acid (UA) on the arterial stiffness progression has been evaluated only in three studies. Our aim was to evaluate its role as a possible determinant of the pulse wave velocity (PWV) progression over a 3.7 ± 0.5 years follow‐up period in hypertensive patients. Specific sex analysis was done due to the well‐known sex interaction with UA levels. We enrolled 422 consecutive hypertensive outpatients. At baseline anamnestic, blood pressure (BP) and laboratory data as well as PWV were assessed. PWV was performed again at follow‐up examination. Hyperuricemia was defined as a UA > 6 mg/dL for women and > 7 mg/dL for men. Baseline age was 53.2 ± 13 years, 58% were males, systolic and diastolic BP (SBP/DBP) 141.7 ± 17.7/86.8 ± 10.8 mm Hg, UA 5.2 ± 1.4 mg/dL, and PWV 8.5 ± 1.9 m/s. At follow‐up, despite better BP values (−8.5 ± 24.6 for SBP and −7.5 ± 15.4 for DBP), PWV increases to 9.1 ± 2.3 m/s (P < 0.001) with mean ΔPWV of+ 0.5 ± 2.2 m/s. A total of 61 patients were hyperuricemic (14.4%), and they present higher PWV baseline (9.0 ± 2.5 vs 8.5 ± 1.8 m/s, P = 0.03) without significant differences in ΔPWV. Hyperuricemic female (6.2%, 11 patients) presents higher baseline PWV without significant differences in ΔPWV. No differences were found in arterial stiffness in hyperuricemic males (20.4%, 50 patients). UA showed association with baseline and ΔPWV in the whole population but it loses statistical significance at the linear regression model. Same figures were also for sex analysis. Our findings provide evidence that baseline UA levels are not determinants of PWV progression over a median follow‐up of 3.8 years’ in hypertensive patients.     

Association of urinary sodium/potassium ratio with structural and functional vascular changes in non‐diabetic hypertensive patients

Studies aiming to associate the sodium/potassium (Na/K) ratio with hypertension use 24‐hour urinary excretion as a daily marker of ingestion. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between urinary Na/K ratio and structural and functional vascular alterations in non‐diabetic hypertensive patients. In hypertensive patients (n = 72), aged between 40 and 70 years, both sexes (61% women), in use of hydrochlorothiazide, we measured blood pressure, 24‐hour urine sample collection, assessment of carotid‐femoral pulse wave velocity (cf‐PWV, Complior), central hemodynamic parameters (SphygmoCor), and post‐occlusive reactive hyperemia (PORH). The participants were divided according to the tertile of 24‐hour urinary Na/K ratio. Each group contained 24 patients. Systolic blood pressure was higher in T2 (133 ± 9 vs 140 ± 9 mmHg, P = .029). C‐reactive protein (CRP) presented higher values in T3 as compared to T1 [0.20(0.10‐0.34) vs 1.19 (0.96‐1.42) mg/dL, P < .001]. Higher values in T3 were also observed for aortic systolic pressure (aoSP) [119(114‐130) vs 135(125‐147) mmHg, P = .002] and cf‐PWV (9.2 ± 1.6 vs 11.1 ± 1.5 m/s, P < .001). The urinary Na/K ratio presented significant correlations with proteinuria (r = .27, P = .023), CRP (r = .77, P < .001), cf‐PWV (r = .41, P < .001), and post‐occlusive reactive hyperemia on cutaneous vascular conductance (PORH CVC) (r = −.23, P = .047). By multivariate linear regression, it was detected an independent and significant association of cf‐PWV with urinary Na/K ratio (R ² = 0.17, P < .001) and PORH CVC with CRP (R ² = 0.30, P = .010). Our data indicated that increased urinary Na/K ratio in non‐diabetic hypertensive patients was associated with higher degree of inflammation, raised peripheral and central pressure levels, and changes suggestive of endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness.     

A multicomponent quality improvement intervention to improve blood pressure and reduce racial disparities in rural primary care practices

The Southeastern United States has the highest prevalence of hypertension and African Americans have disproportionately worse blood pressure control. The authors sought to evaluate the effect of a multicomponent practice‐based quality improvement intervention on lowering mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 12 and 24 months compared with baseline among 525 patients, and to assess for a differential effect of the intervention by race (African Americans vs white). At 12 months, both African Americans (−5.0 mm Hg) and whites (−7.8 mm Hg) had a significant decrease in mean SBP compared with baseline, with no significant between‐group difference. Similarly, at 24 months, mean SBP decreased in both African Americans (−6.0 mm Hg) and whites (−7.2 mm Hg), with no significant difference between groups. Notably, no significant racial disparity in mean SBP at baseline was shown. The intervention was effective in lowering mean SBP in both African Americans and whites but there was no differential effect of the intervention by race.     

Validation study to determine the accuracy of central blood pressure measurement using the SphygmoCor XCEL cuff device in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Central aortic blood pressure could be helpful in the evaluation of patients with aortic stenosis (AS). The SphygmoCor XCEL device estimates central blood pressure (BP) measurement with its easy‐to‐use, operator‐independent procedure. However, this device has not been properly validated against invasive measurement in patients with severe AS. We evaluated the relationship between cuff‐brachial BP, transfer function‐estimated and invasively measured central aortic pressure in patients with severe AS before and after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Agreement between techniques was analyzed and, according to the ARTERY Society recommendations, the minimum acceptable error was a mean difference ± SD ≤5 ± ≤8 mm Hg. A total of 94 patients with AS undergoing TAVR had simultaneous non‐invasive and invasive measurements of central BP before and after the procedure. Before TAVR central systolic BP was in average slightly underestimated, though with wide variability, when using the default calibration of brachial‐cuff SBP (mean difference ± SD, −3 ± 15 mm Hg), and after TAVR the degree of underestimation increased (mean difference ± SD, −9 ± 13 mm Hg). The agreement tended to improve for those patients with low aortic gradient stenosis compared to those with high gradient at baseline (mean difference ± SD, −2 ± 11 mm Hg vs. −4 ± 17, respectively, p = .3). The cuff‐brachial systolic BP yielded numerically lower degree of agreement and weaker correlation with invasive measurements than SphygmoCor XCEL. In patients with severe AS the SphygmoCor XCEL cuff device, despite showing strong correlation, does not meet the ARTERY Society accuracy criteria for non‐invasive measurement of central SBP.     

Improvement in health‐related quality of life after renal sympathetic denervation in real‐world hypertensive patients: 12‐month outcomes in the Global SYMPLICITY Registry

Renal denervation has been shown to reduce blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension, but less is known about its impact on quality of life. This analysis evaluated 12‐month blood pressure and quality of life outcomes in 934 patients from the Global SYMPLICITY Registry who completed the EuroQoL five‐dimensions three‐level questionnaire (EQ‐5D‐3L). At baseline, 32% of patients reported anxiety/depression and 48% reported pain/discomfort. At 12 months (n=496), office and 24‐hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure were reduced by 13.9±26.6 and 7.7±19.3 mm Hg, respectively, and 8% (P<.001) more patients reported no problems in anxiety/depression. Furthermore, numerically more patients reported no problems in pain/discomfort (4%, P=.08). Perceived health‐related quality of life (visual analog scale) improved from baseline to 12 months (68±18 vs 73±17, P<.001), and the improvement was largest among patients with severe anxiety/depression at baseline (50±24 vs 64±22, P=.005 [n=32]). In this analysis, renal denervation was associated with a significant improvement in health‐related quality of life, particularly anxiety/depression.     

Prevalence of high blood pressure and associated factors among adolescents and young people in Tanzania and Uganda

We conducted a cross‐sectional study among school/college students in Tanzania and Uganda to determine the prevalence of high blood pressure (BP) and associated factors. Participants were classified to have high BP if they had pre‐hypertension or hypertension. Interviews were done using the WHO STEPS instrument. Using data from both countries (n = 1596), the overall prevalence of high BP was 40% (95% CI: 37‐42). The prevalence of pre‐hypertension was 29% (95% CI: 26‐31) and that of hypertension was 11% (95% CI: 10‐13). High BP was independently associated with obesity (aOR = 6.7, 95% CI: 2.2‐20.0), male sex (aOR = 3.2, 95% CI: 2.4‐4.4), and among males aged above 20 years (aOR = 5.5, 95% CI: 2.9−10.5). Consumption of fruits/vegetables was associated with decreased odds for high BP (aOR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.50‐0.98). The increasing burden of pre‐hypertension across age groups could explain the early onset of hypertension and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) among young African adults. There is a need for longitudinal studies to explore the drivers of pre‐hypertension in East African adolescents.     

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with essential hypertension uncontrolled by olmesartan: A randomized,double‐blind, 8‐week study

A majority of patients with hypertension fail to achieve blood pressure (BP) control despite treatment with commonly prescribed drugs. This randomized, double‐blind phase III trial assessed the superiority of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg (97/103 mg) to continued olmesartan 20 mg in reducing ambulatory systolic BP after 8‐week treatment in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension uncontrolled with olmesartan 20 mg alone. A total of 376 patients were randomized to receive either sacubitril/valsartan (n = 188) or olmesartan (n = 188). Superior reductions in 24‐hour mean ambulatory systolic BP were observed in the sacubitril/valsartan group vs the olmesartan group (−4.3 mm Hg vs −1.1 mm Hg, P < .001). Reductions in 24‐hour mean ambulatory diastolic BP and pulse pressure and office systolic BP and diastolic BP were significantly greater with sacubitril/valsartan vs olmesartan (P < .014). A greater proportion of patients achieved BP control with sacubitril/valsartan vs olmesartan. The overall incidence of adverse events was comparable between the groups. Compared with continued olmesartan, sacubitril/valsartan was more effective and generally safe in patients with hypertension uncontrolled with olmesartan 20 mg.     

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with olmesartan in Asian patients with essential hypertension: A randomized,double‐blind, 8‐week study

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan vs olmesartan in Asian patients with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension. Patients (N = 1438; mean age, 57.7 years) with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension were randomized to receive once daily administration of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg (n = 479), sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg (n = 473), or olmesartan 20 mg (n = 486) for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was reduction in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) from baseline with sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg vs olmesartan 20 mg at Week 8. Secondary endpoints included msSBP reduction with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg, and reductions in clinic and ambulatory BP and pulse pressure (PP) vs olmesartan. In addition, changes in msBP from baseline in the Chinese subpopulation, elderly (≥65 years), and in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) were assessed. Sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg provided a significantly greater reduction in msSBP than olmesartan 20 mg at Week 8 (between‐treatment difference: −2.33 mm Hg [95% confidence interval (CI) −4.00 to −0.66 mm Hg], P < 0.05 for non‐inferiority and superiority). Greater reductions in msSBP were also observed with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg vs olmesartan 20 mg (−3.52 [−5.19 to −1.84 mm Hg], P < 0.001 for superiority). Similarly, greater reductions in msBP were observed in the Chinese subpopulation, in elderly patients, and those with ISH. In addition, both doses of sacubitril/valsartan provided significantly greater reductions from baseline in nighttime mean ambulatory BP vs olmesartan. Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan 200 or 400 mg once daily is effective and provided superior BP reduction than olmesartan 20 mg in Asian patients with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension and is generally safe and well tolerated.