Effect of upper airway obstruction on blood pressure variability after stroke

Approx. 60% of acute stroke patients have periods of significant UAO (upper airway obstruction) and this is associated with a worse outcome. UAO is associated with repeated fluctuation in BP (blood pressure) and increased BP variability is also associated with a poor outcome in patients with acute stroke. UAO-induced changes in BP, at a time when regional cerebral perfusion is pressure-dependent in areas of critically ischaemic brain, could explain the detrimental effect of UAO on outcome in these patients. The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between UAO and BP variability in patients with acute stroke. Twelve acute stroke patients and 12 age-, sex- and BMI (body mass index)-matched controls underwent a sleep study with non-invasive continuous monitoring of BP to assess the impact of UAO on BP control after stroke. Stroke patients had significantly more 15 mmHg dips in BP/h than the controls (51 compared with 6.7 respectively; P<0.004). Stroke patients also demonstrated significantly higher BP variability than the controls (26.8 compared with 14.4 mmHg; P<0.001). There were significantly more 15 mmHg dips in BP/h in stroke patients who had significant UAO than those who did not (85.7 compared with 29.5 respectively; P<0.032). Furthermore, stroke patients without UAO (RDI <10, where RDI is respiratory disturbance index) had significantly more 15 mmHg dips in BP/h than the controls (29.5 compared with 6.7 respectively; P<0.037). There was a positive correlation between the severity of UAO (RDI) and 15 mmHg dips in BP/h (r=0.574, P<0.005) in stroke patients. Our results suggest that UAO alone does not explain BP variation post-stroke, but it does play an important role, particularly in determining the severity of the BP fluctuation.     

Optimal dose of candesartan for renoprotection in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy: a double-blind randomized cross-over study

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the optimal dose of the angiotensin II receptor antagonist candesartan cilexetil for renoprotection as reflected by short-term changes in albuminuria in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 23 hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy were enrolled in this double-blind randomized cross-over trial with four treatment periods, each lasting 2 months. Each patient received placebo and candesartan: 8, 16, and 32 mg daily in random order. Antihypertensive medication was discontinued before enrollment, except for long-acting furosemide, which all patients received throughout the study in median (range) doses of 40 (30-160) mg daily. End points were albuminuria (turbidimetry), 24-h blood pressure (BP) (Takeda-TM2420), and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (51Cr-labeled EDTA plasma clearance technique). RESULTS: Values obtained during placebo treatment: albuminuria [geometric mean (95% CI)] 700 (486-1,007) mg/24-h, 24-h BP (mean +/- SE) 147 +/- 4/78 +/- 2 mmHg, and GFR 84 +/- 6 ml/min/1.73 m2. All three doses of candesartan significantly reduced albuminuria and 24-h BP compared with placebo. Mean (95% CI) reductions in albuminuria were 33% (21-43), 59% (52-65), and 52% (44-59) with increasing doses of candesartan. Albuminuria was reduced significantly more by the two highest doses than by the lowest dose (P < 0.01); 24-h systolic BP was reduced by 9 (2-16), 9 (2-16), and 13 (6-20) mmHg and 24-h diastolic BP was reduced by 5 (2-8), 4 (1-7), and 6 (3-9) mmHg with increasing doses of candesartan. There were no significant differences in the reductions in BP between the three doses. GFR was decreased by approximately 6 ml/min/1.73 m2 by all three doses of candesartan (P < 0.05 versus placebo). CONCLUSIONS: The optimal dose of candesartan is 16 mg daily for renoprotection, as reflected by short-term reduction in albuminuria, in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy.     

No adverse effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, sulindac and diclofenac sodium, on blood pressure control with a calcium antagonist, nifedipine, in elderly hypertensive patients.

Effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) on blood pressure (BP) control was evaluated in elderly hypertensive patients treated with calcium antagonist. The study was based on a randomized, crossover design to compare the effect of an NSAID, sulindac, with that of another NSAID, diclofenac sodium, in the hypertension treatment. The study was completed in six elderly female subjects (the average age: 66 +/- 3 year) whose systolic BP and diastolic BP were more than 160 mmHg and more than 95 mmHg, respectively. When BP was controlled by nifedipine (20 mg x 2 per day in slow releasing form) within normal limits, sulindac (100 mg x 3 per day) or diclofenac sodium (25 mg x 3 per day) was administered for a week. After one week-washout period, the other NSAID was substituted. Plasma and urinary variables were measured on the final day of each study period. The average systolic BP and diastolic BP and the entry of study were 167 +/- 5 mmHg and 93 +/- 5 mmHg, respectively. Nifedipine significantly decreased the systolic BP to 140 +/- 4 mmHg (p less than 0.02) and the diastolic BP to 84 +/- 4 mmHg (p less than 0.05). Addition of either sulindac or diclofenac sodium did not affect BP, whereas urinary PGE2 excretion and plasma renin activity were significantly inhibited. Plasma creatinine and electrolyte concentration were not changed by the NSAIDs. The results indicate that either sulindac or diclofenac sodium does not interfere with control of hypertension by a calcium antagonist, nifedipine in in elderly hypertensive patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

A placebo-controlled comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of candesartan cilexetil, 8 mg, and losartan, 50 mg, as monotherapy in patients with essential hypertension, using 36-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

This double-blind, randomised, controlled study compared the efficacy of candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (n = 87) and losartan 50 mg (n = 89), once daily for 6 weeks, relative to placebo (n = 80) in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure (DBP): 95-115 mmHg). Ambulatory BP measurements were done every 15 min over 36 h. At the end of the 6-week treatment, the mean change in DBP between the baseline and the 0-24-h period after the last dose of study medication was greater in patients receiving candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (-7.3 mmHg +/- 6.9 mmHg) compared with losartan 50 mg (-5.1 mmHg +/- 4.9 mmHg) (p < 0.05) or placebo (0.3 mmHg +/- 6.5 mmHg) (p < 0.001). The mean change in systolic BP (SBP) during this time was greater in patients receiving candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (-10.8 mmHg +/- 11.3 mmHg), or losartan 50 mg (-8.8 mmHg +/- 8.9 mmHg) than placebo (1.2 mmHg +/- 9.9 mmHg) (p < 0.001). Candesartan cilexetil 8 mg was associated with a greater reduction in DBP and SBP, relative to placebo, when compared with losartan 50 mg, during both daytime and night-time, and between 12 and 24 h after dosing (p < 0.001). Both active treatments were well tolerated. In patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension, candesartan cilexetil 8 mg therefore had greater, more consistent antihypertensive efficacy throughout the day and the night, and long-lasting efficacy after the last dose, compared with losartan 50 mg. This greater efficacy is maintained with an excellent tolerability associated with members of the angiotensin Il type 1-receptor blocker class.     

Long-term dual blockade with candesartan and lisinopril in hypertensive patients with diabetes: the CALM II study

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the long-term effects of the combination of candesartan and lisinopril with high-dose lisinopril on systolic blood pressure in patients with hypertension and diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, double-dummy study with a 12-month follow-up. Drug therapy was either lisinopril 40 mg once daily or dual-blockade treatment with candesartan 16 mg once daily and lisinopril 20 mg once daily. The study comprised 75 type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients aged 35-74 years. The main outcome measures were seated and 24-h ambulatory systolic blood pressure. RESULTS: Reduction in systolic blood pressure (24-h systolic blood pressure) reduction was obtained in both treatment arms (mean reduction at final follow-up: dual blockade 6 mmHg vs. lisinopril 2 mmHg), but no significant difference was found between dual-blockade and lisinopril 40 mg once daily (P = 0.10). Both treatments were generally well tolerated, and similar low rates of side effects were found in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference between lisinopril 40 mg once daily and lisinopril 20 mg in combination with candesartan 16 mg once daily in reducing systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients with diabetes.     

Management of uncontrolled hypertension in a nurse-led clinic compared with conventional care for patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a nurse-led hypertension clinic with conventional community care in general practice in the management of uncontrolled hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied 120 men and women outpatient attendees (61% non-Caucasian) with type 2 diabetes and a seated blood pressure (BP) >or=140/80 mmHg. All patients were being treated for hypertension, and 71% had increased urinary albumin excretion (UAE). Patients were allocated to either a nurse-led hypertension clinic or conventional primary care. The primary outcome measure was a change in systolic BP. Secondary outcome measures were total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, total triglycerides, HbA(1c), UAE, serum creatinine, and changes in absolute stroke and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk scores. RESULTS: The mean (95% CI) difference in the decrement of systolic BP was 12.6 mmHg (5.9-19.3) (P = 0.000) in favor of the nurse-led group, whose patients were three times more likely to a reach target systolic BP <140 mmHg compared with conventional care (P = 0.003). A significant fall in 10-year CHD (P = 0.004) and stroke risk (P = 0.000) scores occurred only in the nurse-led group. There were no significant differences in the reduction of diastolic BP or any of the other secondary outcome measures at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional care, a nurse-led hypertension clinic is a more effective intervention for patients with type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled hypertension. A target systolic BP <140 mmHg is more readily achieved and may be associated with significant reductions in 10-year cardiovascular disease risk scores.     

急性脑卒中合并院内获得性肺炎患者影响预后的危险因素分析

目的:分析急性脑卒中患者合并院内获得性肺炎(HAP)患者的危险因素及其与预后的相关性。方法:回顾性分析98例急性脑卒中患者,依据是否合并HAP分为:研究组(合并HAP)和对照组(未合并HAP)各49例。分析2组的年龄、收缩压(SP)、舒张压(DP)、血胆固醇(CHOL)水平、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、中国脑卒中临床神经功能缺损程度评分(CSS)、反复唾液吞咽测试次数及耐甲氧西林金葡菌(MRSA)感染率、铜绿色假单胞菌(PA)感染率、白色念珠菌(CA)感染率与随访1年后生活自理能力评分(BI)的相关性,并比较2组BI、再出血率及病死率。结果:2组的年龄、CSS评分、反复唾液吞咽测试次数、SP、DP、HbA1c、MRSA感染率、PA感染率、CA感染率均与BI值呈独立相关,而CHOL则无明显相关。2组的BI、再出血率、病死率都存在统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论:急性脑卒中合并HAP患者影响预后的危险因素有年龄、CSS评分、吞咽功能、SP、DP、HbA1c、MRSA感染率、PA感染率、CA感染率。     

Comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness of candesartan and losartan in the management of hypertension and heart failure: a systematic review, meta- and cost-utility analysis

The UK National Health Service (NHS) currently spends in excess of ￡250 million per annum on angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure; with candesartan currently dominating the market. With the recent introduction of generic losartan, we set out to directly compare the branded market leader to its now cheaper alternative. The primary objectives were to compare the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy and cardiovascular outcomes of candesartan and losartan in the treatment of essential hypertension and chronic heart failure, respectively. The secondary objective was to model their comparative incremental cost-effectiveness in a UK NHS setting. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Hypertension and Heart Group's specialist register, Medline (1950-February 2010), and Embase (1980-February 2010) were included in the search strategy. Selection criteria were randomised studies of candesartan versus losartan in adults (> 18 years). The main outcome measures were as follows: Hypertension: mean change from baseline in trough (24 h postdose) systolic and diastolic BP. Heart failure: composite of cardiovascular death and hospital admission for management of heart failure. Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Eight (three of which met inclusion criteria) and zero trials compared candesartan directly with losartan in the treatment of hypertension and heart failure, respectively. A between-treatment difference of -1.96 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -2.40 to -1.51] for trough diastolic BP and -3.00 mmHg (95% CI -3.79 to -2.22) for trough systolic BP in favour of candesartan was observed. Based on this differential, a 10-year Markov model estimates the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained to exceed ￡40,000 for using candesartan in place of generic losartan. Candesartan reduces BP to a slightly greater extent when compared with losartan, however, such difference is unlikely to be cost-effective based on current acquisition costs, perceived NHS affordability thresholds and use of combination regimens. We could find no robust evidence supporting the superiority of candesartan over losartan in the treatment of heart failure. We therefore recommend using generic losartan as the ARB of choice which could save the UK NHS approximately ￡200 million per annum in drug costs.     

Use of moxonidine in elderly patients with resistant hypertension

BACKGROUND: Treatment of hypertension in the elderly people reduces the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. Effective treatment often will require the use of two or more antihypertensive agents. Elderly people are at increased risk of adverse events from medication because of physiological changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, polypharmacy and drug interactions. They might not tolerate conventional add-on regimens of antihypertensives as a result. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use of the I1-imidazoline receptor agonist moxonidine as an 'add-on' agent in elderly patients with resistant hypertension. METHODS: We investigated the safety and efficacy of moxonidine (200-400 microg) in a group of elderly patients whose blood pressure (BP) control remained poor despite treatment with two or more antihypertensives. BP was assessed by ambulatory BP monitoring with Spacelabs oscillometric equipment (Model 90207) before and after 6 weeks of treatment with moxonidine used as an 'add-on' agent with the patients normal medication. RESULTS: Following treatment with moxonidine, the mean daytime systolic BP fell from 169.2 to 153.8 mmHg, a significant reduction of 15.4 +/- 8.9 mmHg (P = 0.003). The mean daytime diastolic BP fell from 91.6 to 84.2 mmHg, a reduction of 7.4 +/- 5.8 mmHg (P = 0.017). For the night-time readings, the systolic BP fell from 151.1 to 141.2 mmHg, a reduction of 9.3 +/- 9.3 mmHg (P = 0.05). The corresponding diastolic fall in BP was not significant (77.9-74.7 mmHg). The 24 h-readings showed a significant reduction in the mean systolic BP from 163.0 to 148.6 mmHg (P = 0.004). The mean diastolic BP also fell significantly from 87.2 to 80.2 mmHg (P = 0.013). Clinical BP readings also showed a significant reduction from 195.9 +/- 19.6 to 174 +/- 17.8 mmHg (P = 0.002) and 103.6 +/- 9.5 to 99.0 +/- 12.4 mmHg (P = 0.013) for systolic and diastolic readings respectively. Moxonidine was well tolerated in 11 of the14 patients. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that moxonidine might have a place as an 'add-on' treatment in elderly patients whose hypertension is poorly controlled despite treatment with two or more antihypertensive agents.     

强化超滤对老年维持性血液透析患者高血压的影响

目的 观察通过强化超滤以进一步降低干体质量对老年维持性血液透析患者高血压的影响.方法 老年维持性血液透析合并高血压患者34名分为对照组和超滤组.对照组维持常规血液透析及常规超滤.超滤组维持常规血液透析,并持续缓慢增加超滤量,降低干体质量.观察持续28周,比较2组患者干体质量和血压的变化. 结果 基点处2组患者干体质量基本相同[(64.81±13.26)Kg和(64.49±13.83) Kg,t=0.508,P=0.618],透析前收缩压[(155.12±13.77)mmHg和(155.47±9.92) mmHg,t=0.086,P=0.932](1mmHg=0.133Kpa)及舒张压[(78.59±11.41)mmHg和(78.71±10.96) mmHg,t=0.031,P=0.976]未见明显差异(P＞0.05).观察第28周时,2组患者干体重体质量分别为(65.56±13.75)Kg和(62.22±13.34)Kg,较前下降(0.36±1.12)Kg和(2.27±1.03)Kg,超滤组于体质量低于对照组(t=3.785,P=0.002).透析前收缩压为(155.29±12.73) mmHg和(139.82±4.14) mHg,分别和较前下降(0.53±4.57) mmHg和(14.29±10.55) mmHg,超滤组收缩压低于对照组(t=4.767,P=0.000).透析前舒张压分别为(79.12±9.84) mmHg和(68.24±3.57) mmHg,分别较前下降(0.53±4.57) mmHg和(9.00±9.46) mmHg,超滤组舒张压低于对照组(t=4.298,P=0.000). 结论 通过强化超滤降低干体质量,有利于老年维持性血液透析患者高血压的控制.     

Lercanidipine is an effective and well tolerated antihypertensive drug regardless the cardiovascular risk profile: The LAURA study

To determine whether the antihypertensive effectiveness of lercanidipine was independent of the different cardiovascular risk levels. Patients with treated or untreated mild-to-moderate essential hypertension were included in a multicentre, prospective, non-comparative, open-label study. Patients received lercanidipine (10 mg/day, uptitrated to 20 mg/day) during 6 months. A total of 3175 patients, age 63 +/- 10 years, 51% women, were included. The cardiovascular risk was low in 237 patients, medium in 1396, high in 722, and very high in 820. At baseline, blood pressure (BP) was 159.5 +/- 11.7/95.2 +/- 7.4 mmHg. BP was progressively higher according to increase in cardiovascular risk. After 6 months of treatment, BP was 136.0 +/- 9.7/79.7 +/- 6.8 mmHg. The decrease in systolic BP and diastolic BP at each follow-up visit compared with baseline was statistically significant both in the intergroup and intragroup comparisons (p < 0.001). Mean decreases of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were -18.5/-13.8 mmHg in the low risk group, -23/-15.2 mmHg in the medium risk group, -24.4/-16.1 mmHg in the high risk group, and -27.4/-17.4 mmHg in the very high risk group. Most frequent side effects were oedema (5.1%), headache (3.3%), flushes (2.5%), and asthenia (1%). Only 1.7% of patients discontinued antihypertensive medication because of adverse events. Tolerability of lercanidipine was independent of the cardiovascular risk group. Lercanidipine was effective and well-tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension in the daily practice. The effectiveness and safety of the drug were independent of the degree of cardiovascular risk.     

Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta‐analytical approach

Objective: To compare the efficacy of valsartan in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) reduction with other angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in essential hypertension. Methods: Systematic literature search of databases between October 1997 and May 2008. Meta‐analysis of short‐term, double‐blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for treatment of adult hypertension (DBP: 90–115 mmHg). Random‐effects meta‐regression adjusting for baseline blood pressure (BP) was used to analyse the data. Mean change in SBP and DBP was estimated for each individual drug and dose combination. Results: In all, 31 RCTs (n = 13,110 patients) were included in the analysis. Six studies include trial arms with candesartan, six irbesartan, 13 losartan, two olmesartan, five telmisartan and 12 valsartan. The weighted average reduction in mean SBP and DBP for valsartan 160 mg was ?15.32 mmHg (95% CI: ?17.09, ?13.63) and ?11.3 mmHg (95% CI: ?12.15, ?10.52) and for 320 mg was ?15.85 mmHg (95% CI: ?17.60, ?14.12) and ?11.97 mmHg (95% CI: ?12.81, ?11.16); these are statistically significantly greater reductions compared with losartan 100 mg, which was ?12.01 mmHg (95% CI: ?13.78, ?10.25) and ?9.37 mmHg (95% CI: ?10.18, ?8.54) for SBP and DBP respectively. There is evidence that valsartan 160 mg reduces SBP and DBP more than irbesartan 150 mg and reduced DBP more than candesartan 16 mg. No other statistically significant difference in efficacy is demonstrated. Conclusion: Valsartan administered at 160 or 320 mg is more effective at lowering BP than losartan 100 mg and shows comparable efficacy to other ARBs in patients with essential hypertension.     

Cardiovascular responses to acute exercise in patients with cerebrovascular accidents

Blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) responses to isometric hand grip, exercise with the cybex arm ergometer, and cybex fitron cycle ergometer were recorded for 19 stroke subjects and 19 control subjects matched by age and gender. Mean age in both groups was 66 years. There was no significant difference in the resting HR (controls: 69 +/- 10, patients: 70 +/- 11 beats per minute) and BP measurements (systolic--controls: 140 +/- 17, patients: 135 +/- 21; diastolic--controls 80 +/- 8, patients: 75 +/- 11mmHg). There was also no significant difference in either the mean HR (controls: 79 +/- 10, patients: 81 +/- 12 beats per minute) or BP (systolic--controls: 174 +/- 23, patients: 165 +/- 27; diastolic--controls: 98 +/- 15, patients: 92 +/- 14) response to exercise. With the arm ergometer test, the control group attained a significantly higher maximum systolic (190 +/- 23 mmHg) and diastolic blood pressure (102 +/- 15mmHg) than the stroke group (systolic 165 +/- 23; diastolic 91 +/- 10mmHg). During the leg ergometer exercise test, results were similar in both groups except that work completed was significantly higher for the control group (3592 +/- 1162kg) than for patients (2512 +/- 1348kg). None of the patients reported symptoms of dizziness, fainting, or chest pain. Prescribed exercise in stroke patients under supervision and within patient tolerance was found to be safe.     

Blood pressure behaviour in chronic daily headache

The objective was to examine the association between high blood pressure (BP) and chronic daily headache using 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitorization (24-h ABPM). This was a cross sectional study in an out-patient clinic. Women were selected among patients referred for first evaluation, 62 with chronic daily headache and 57 without chronic daily headache. The main outcome measures were mean office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP), mean systolic and diastolic daytime and night-time BP and BP load, and mean systolic and diastolic nocturnal fall. Office systolic BP was 138.2 mmHg for women with chronic daily headache and 141.7 mmHg for women without headache (P = 0.36). Office diastolic BP was 88.9 mmHg for women with headache and 92.7 mmHg for women without headache (P = 0.17). Mean daytime and mean night-time systolic BP was, respectively, 122.2 mmHg and 108.8 mmHg for women with headache and 122.9 mmHg and 109.5 for women without headache (P = 0.82 and P = 0.80, respectively). Mean daytime and mean night-time diastolic BP was, respectively, 78.6 mmHg and 65.4 mmHg for women with headache and 79.9 mmHg and 67.1 mmHg for the women without headache (P = 0.80 and P = 0.45, respectively). There was no difference between the two groups regarding systolic and diastolic BP load and nocturnal systolic and diastolic fall. No significant difference in BP values was observed in women with chronic daily headache compared with women without headache using 24-h ABPM.     

Effect of aging on blood pressure in Leh,Ladakh, a high-altitude (3524 m) community,by comparison with a Japanese town

The effect of aging on blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) was investigated in a cross-sectional study in the high-altitude community of Leh, Ladakh (altitude: 3524 m) and a Japanese community in U town, Hokkaido (altitude: 25 m). BP and HR were obtained in a sitting position from 332 subjects 13–81 years of age in Ladakh, and from 216 Japanese citizens, 24–79 years of age. Measurements were taken after a 2-min rest, using a semi-automated BP device (UA-767 PC, A&D Co. LTD, Tokyo). High-altitude people showed higher diastolic BP and HR values than lowland people (83.2 vs. 76.9 mmHg and 78.6 vs. 69.2 bpm, P < 0.001), but no difference in systolic BP. Highland people also showed a steeper BP increase with age than the lowland people (systolic BP: 0.7476 vs. 0.3179 mmHg/year, P < 0.0005; diastolic BP: 0.3196 vs. 0.0750 mmHg/year, P < 0.001). This chronoecologic investigation in Ladakh examined the circulation as a physiological system at high-altitude. Our data indicate the need for a more comprehensive cardiovascular assessment for a better diagnosis and a more fruitful treatment. Longitudinal observations of effects of socio-ecologic factors on the cardiovascular system should help prevent strokes and other cardiovascular events, especially at high altitude.     

Renal sympathetic denervation therapy in the real world: results from the Heidelberg registry

Introduction

Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) is a novel treatment option in patients with treatment-resistant arterial hypertension. A subset of recently published randomized and non-randomized trials indicates that RDN leads to sustained lowering of blood pressure (BP) under controlled study conditions. However, registry data that allow evaluation of safety and efficacy in a real-world setting are largely missing.

Methods

Sixty-three consecutive patients with treatment-resistant hypertension underwent RDN with the radiofrequency-based Symplicity? catheter. As part of our prospective registry, treatment efficacy and safety were monitored after 3, 6, and 12 months.

Results

At 6 months follow-up, office systolic BP significantly improved by 19 + 23 mmHg as compared to baseline, while diastolic BP values reduced by 6 + 13 mmHg (p < 0.05). One year after RDN, office BP levels further improved (26 + 25 mmHg in systolic BP and 9 + 13 mmHg in diastolic BP, respectively), even though 19 patients had reduced the number and/or dosage of antihypertensive agents. The response rate, defined as reduction of office systolic BP of ≥10 mmHg, was 73 % after 6 months. Baseline BP was the only significant predictor of blood pressure response, whereas no correlation was found between the number of ablation points and the individual changes in office blood pressure. Interestingly, patients with challenging renal anatomy profited somewhat less from the procedure than those with “normal” renal anatomy. Procedure related adverse events occurred in three patients (4.7 %) and were limited to vascular access complications.

Conclusions

RDN with the Symplicity? system is safe and effective in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension also in a real-world setting.     

Vascular protection with candesartan after experimental acute stroke in hypertensive rats: a dose-response study

We have shown that candesartan decreases the acute stroke-induced elevation of mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in Wistar rats and improves functional outcome. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the same benefit could be achieved in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). Animals were subjected to middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) or sham for 3 h followed by reperfusion. Either candesartan (0.1, 0.3, or 1.0 mg/kg) or saline was administered. MAP of the rats was monitored by means of telemetry, and neurological function was assessed. Infarct size, edema formation, and hemoglobin content in the ischemic hemisphere were evaluated 24 h after the stroke. MAP of SHR increased immediately upon MCAO from 135 (baseline) to 189 mm Hg, and it remained elevated until reperfusion. Candesartan decreased MAP in a dose-dependent manner, with a drop below baseline after a dose of 1.0 mg/kg. SHRs experienced greater blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects of candesartan after stroke compared with a sham condition (p < 0.0001). Neurological deficit after stroke was reduced in candesartan-treated animals, revealing a dose-dependent effect (p < 0.01). Infarct size, edema formation, and hemoglobin content were all reduced by candesartan at doses of 0.1 and 0.3 mg/kg (p < 0.05 for all). Candesartan (1 mg/kg) was not different from saline. Low doses of candesartan provide neurovascular protection after stroke in SHRs. Caution is warranted because acute stroke increases the sensitivity to BP lowering, which, in turn, increases the likelihood of overshooting.     

尤瑞克林治疗急性后循环脑梗死疗效观察

【目的】探讨尤瑞克林治疗急性后循环脑梗死的疗效及安全性。【方法】急性后循环脑梗死患者70例,按近、远期时间分为治疗组（n=36）和对照组（n=34）。对照组常规给予抗血小板聚集药物和对症处理,治疗组在对照组治疗的基础上给予尤瑞克林0．15PNAU,静脉滴注,每日1次,连用7天。治疗前后评定患者神经功能缺损（NIHSS）和日常生活活动能力（mRS）,并观察临床疗效。检测血尿常规、肝肾功能、凝血功能、心电图,监测血压,观察并记录各种与治．疗相关的不良反应。【结果】与对照组相比,治疗组NIHSS评分和mRS评分显著降低（均P〈O．05）,临床疗效显著升高（P〈O．05）,不良反应少且轻微。【结论】尤瑞克林治疗急性后循环脑梗死安全、有效,值得临床推广使用。     

急性缺血性卒中静脉溶栓患者急性期积极降压对再灌注的影响分析

目的探讨急性缺血性卒中静脉溶栓患者急性期积极降压对再灌注的影响。方法选取行重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(rt-PA)静脉溶栓治疗且收缩压在150~185 mm Hg的96例急性缺血性卒中患者,随机将其分为观察组和对照组,每组48例。观察组患者在急性期采取积极降压,即在溶栓开始60 min内将收缩压控制在140~150 mm Hg并至少维持72 h;对照组患者按照指南标准降压,即将收缩压控制在180 mm Hg以下。2组患者在静脉溶栓前及溶栓后24、48及72 h给予多模式核磁共振检验,记录2组治疗后的血压水平、美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分、血流再灌注及血管再通情况,对2组随访3个月,观察2组生存状态及改良Rankin量表评分。结果与对照组比较,观察组患者在静脉溶栓后24、48及72 h的收缩压水平均显著较低(P0.05),而2组同时期舒张压、NIHSS评分及溶栓后24 h血管分级比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);2组3个月自发性脑内出血率、生存率、改良Rankin评分为0~2分、血流再灌注率及血管再通率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论急性缺血性卒中静脉溶栓患者急性期积极降压对再灌注未见不良影响,亦不会增加患者致残或死亡风险,提示静脉溶栓后早期避免收缩压骤升可能利于改善患者预后。     

Blood pressure variation and cardiovascular risk in hypertension

Disruption of circadian rhythm of blood pressure (BP) is associated with advanced target organ damage and poor cardiovascular prognosis. We studied silent cerebrovascular disease and stroke events in older Japanese patients with different nocturnal BP dipping. There was a J-shaped relationship of nocturnal dipping status with silent cerebral infarcts detected by brain MRI at baseline, and with stroke incidence during the follow-up period. The extreme-dippers (with marked nocturnal BP dipping) and risers (with higher nocturnal BP than awake BP) had a higher prevalence of silent cerebral infarcts and poorer stroke prognosis than those with appropriate nocturnal BP dipping (dippers). Extreme-dippers tended to have predominant systolic hypertension and increased BP variability. Several factors are affecting the diurnal BP variation pattern. The non-dipping pattern is associated with autonomic nervous dysfunction and poor sleep quality due to nocturnal behavior and sleep apnea. Extreme-dippers might have increased arterial stiffness with reduced circulating blood volume in addition to an excessive morning surge due to alpha-adrenergic hyperactivity. Morning BP surge, which is partly associated with nocturnal BP dipping status, was a predictor of stroke event independently for ambulatory BP level and silent cerebral infarcts. Antihypertensive medication that normalize the disrupted circadian BP variation might improve cardiovascular prognosis in high-risk hypertensive patients.