Prevalence,Awareness, Treatment,and Control of Hypertension in Lebanon

The prevalence and factors related to hypertension (HTN) treatment and control are well investigated in the Western world but remain poorly understood in the Middle East and in middle‐income countries such as Lebanon. In order to measure the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control rates of HTN in Lebanon, the authors measured blood pressure (BP) in 1697 adults. The prevalence of optimal BP (<120/80 mm Hg) was 33% and that of pre‐HTN (BP ≥120/80 mm Hg but <140/90 mm Hg) was 30%. The prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control (among treated hypertensive) rates of HTN were 36.9%, 53%, 48.9%, and 54.2%, respectively. Overall, only 27% of patients with HTN had their BP under control. Awareness was the most important predictor of treatment. No predictor of control could be identified. The authors concluded that HTN is prevalent in Lebanon and its overall control is low. Improving awareness is the most important target for intervention.     

Comparison of day‐to‐day blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus to those without diabetes: Asia BP@Home Study

Blood pressure variability (BPV) has been shown to be independently associated with cardiovascular (CV) mortality and morbidity. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have also been shown to have increased BPV. We aimed to compare BPV in hypertensive patients with diabetes with those without diabetes. A total of 1443 hypertensive patients measured their blood pressure (BP) twice in the morning and twice before bed at home for a week. Demographic data, history of T2DM, and anti‐hypertensive use were captured. Clinic BP was measured twice in the clinic. Control of BP was defined as clinic systolic BP (SBP) <140 mm Hg and home SBP < 135 mm Hg. BPV was based on home SBP measurements. A total of 362(25.1%) hypertensives had diabetes and 47.4% were male. Mean age was 62.3 ± 12.1 years. There was no difference in the mean clinic SBP in both groups (139.9 mm Hg vs 138.4 mm Hg P = .188). However, the mean morning home SBP was significantly higher and control rate lower in hypertensives with diabetes than those without (132.3 ± 15 mm Hg vs 129.7 ± 14.4 mm Hg P = .005, 39.4% vs 47.6% P = .007), respectively. Masked uncontrolled morning hypertension was higher in those with diabetes versus those without (12.8% vs 8.4%, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in BPV between those with and without diabetes. In summary, clinic SBP was similar in hypertensives with or without diabetes. However, control of BP based on both clinic and home SBP thresholds was poorer in hypertensives with diabetes compared to those without. Masked uncontrolled morning hypertension was higher in those with diabetes than those without. There was no difference in BPV between the two groups.     

Daytime Systolic Ambulatory Blood Pressure With a Direct Switch Between Candesartan Monotherapy and the Fixed‐Dose Combination Olmesartan/Amlodipine in Patients With Uncontrolled Essential Hypertension (SEVICONTROL‐1)

A direct switch of candesartan to the fixed‐dose combination olmesartan/amlodipine in uncontrolled hypertension is a frequent clinical requirement but is not covered by current labeling. An open‐label, prospective, single‐arm phase IIIb study was performed in patients with 32 mg candesartan followed by olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg. The primary endpoint was change in mean daytime systolic blood pressure (BP). Mean daytime systolic BP was reduced by 9.2±12.6 mm Hg (P<.0001) after substituting candesartan for olmesartan/amlodipine (baseline BP 140.2±9.7 mm Hg). The reduction in office BP was 9.4±18.4/4.0±9.6 mm Hg; P<.002). Overall, 61.3% of patients achieved a target BP <140/90 mm Hg using office BP and <135/85 mm Hg using ambulatory BP measurement. There were 8 adverse events with a possible relation to study drug and 1 unrelated serious adverse events. In conclusion, patients with uncontrolled moderate arterial hypertension being treated using candesartan monotherapy achieve a further reduction of BP when switched directly to a fixed‐dose combination of olmesartan 40 mg/amlodipine 10 mg.     

Highlights of the 2019 Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines and perspectives on the management of Asian hypertensive patients

Unlike other international guidelines but in accord with the earlier Japanese Society of Hypertension (JSH) guidelines, the 2019 JSH guidelines (“JSH 2019”) continue to emphasize the importance of out‐of‐office blood pressure (BP) measurements obtained with a home BP device. Another unique characteristic of JSH 2019 is that it sets clinical questions about the management of hypertension that are based on systematic reviews of updated evidence. JSH 2019 states that individuals with office BP < 140/90 mm Hg do not have normal BP. The final decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension should be performed based on out‐of‐office BP values together with office BP measurements. For hypertensive adults with comorbidities, the office BP goal is usually <130/80 mm Hg and the home BP goal is <125/75 mm Hg. Recommendations of JSH 2019 would be valuable for not only Japanese hypertensive patients but also Asian hypertensive patients, who share the same features including higher incidence of stroke compared with that of myocardial infarction and a steeper blood pressure‐vascular event relationship.     

Management of Hypertensive Patients With Multiple Drug Intolerances: A Single‐Center Experience of a Novel Treatment Algorithm

Multiple drug intolerance to antihypertensive medications (MDI‐HTN) is an overlooked cause of nonadherence. In this study, 55 patients with MDI‐HTN were managed with a novel treatment algorithm utilizing sequentially initiated monotherapies or combinations of maximally tolerated doses of fractional tablet doses, liquid formulations, transdermal preparations, and off‐label tablet medications. A total of 10% of referred patients had MDI‐HTN, resulting in insufficient pharmacotherapy and baseline office blood pressure (OBP) of 178±24/94±15 mm Hg. At baseline, patients were intolerant to 7.6±3.6 antihypertensives; they were receiving 1.4±1.1 medications. After 6 months on the novel MDI‐HTN treatment algorithm, both OBP and home blood pressure (HBP) were significantly reduced, with patients receiving 2.0±1.2 medications. At 12 months, OBP was reduced from baseline by 17±5/9±3 mm Hg (P<.01, P<.05) and HBP was reduced by 11±5/12±3 mm Hg (P<.01 for both) while patients were receiving 1.9±1.1 medications. Application of a stratified medicine approach allowed patients to tolerate increased numbers of medications and achieved significant long‐term lowering of blood pressure.     

Blood pressure control and cardiovascular risk profile in hypertensive patients under specialist care in Argentina: Results from the CHARTER study

Worldwide, hypertension control rate is far from ideal. Some studies suggest that patients treated by specialists have a greater chance to achieve control. The authors aimed to determine the BP control rate among treated hypertensive patients under specialist care in Argentina, to characterize patients regarding their cardiovascular risk profile and antihypertensive drug use, and to assess the variables independently associated with adequate BP control. The authors included adult hypertensive patients under stable treatment, managed in 10 specialist centers across Argentina. Office BP was measured thrice with a validated oscillometric device. Adequate BP control was defined as an average of the three readings <140/90 mm Hg (and <150/90 in patients older than 80 years). The authors estimated the proportion of adequate BP control and the variables independently associated with it through a multiple conditional logistic regression model. Among the 1146 included patients, 48.2% were men with a mean age of 63.5 (±13.1) years old. Mean office BP was 135.3 (±14.8)/80.8 (±10) mm Hg, with a 64.8% (95% CI: 62%‐67.6%) of adequate control. The mean number of antihypertensive drugs was 2.1 per participant, the commonest being angiotensin receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers. In multivariable analysis, only female sex was a predictor of adequate BP control (OR 1.33 [95% CI 1.02‐1.72], P = .04). In conclusion, almost 65% of hypertensive patients treated in specialist centers in Argentina have adequate BP control. The challenge for future research is to define strategies in order to translate this control rate to the primary care level, where most patients are managed.     

Aldosterone-Related Myocardial Extracellular Matrix Expansion in Hypertension in Humans: A Proof-of-Concept Study by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance

ObjectivesThis study sought to assess the respective effects of aldosterone and blood pressure (BP) levels on myocardial fibrosis in humans.BackgroundExperimentally, aldosterone promotes left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, and interstitial myocardial fibrosis in the presence of high salt intake.MethodsThe study included 20 patients with primary aldosteronism (PA) (high aldosterone and high BP), 20 patients with essential hypertension (HTN) (average aldosterone and high BP), 20 patients with secondary aldosteronism due to Bartter/Gitelman (BG) syndrome (high aldosterone and normal BP), and 20 healthy subjects (HS) (normal aldosterone and normal BP). Participants in each group were of similar age and sex distributions, and asymptomatic. Cardiac magnetic resonance including cine and T1 mapping was performed blind to the study group to quantify global LV mass index, as well as intracellular mass index and extracellular mass index considered as a measure of myocardial fibrosis in vivo.ResultsMedian plasma aldosterone concentration was as follows: PA = 709 pmol/l (interquartile range [IQR]: 430 to 918 pmol/l); HTN = 197 pmol/l (IQR: 121 to 345 pmol/l); BG = 297 pmol/l (IQR: 180 to 428 pmol/l); and HS = 105 pmol/l (IQR: 85 to 227 pmol/l). Systolic BP was as follows: PA = 147 ± 15 mm Hg; HTN = 133 ± 19 mm Hg; BG = 116 ± 9 mm Hg; and HS = 117 ± 12 mm Hg. LV end-diastolic volume showed underloading in BG and overloading in patients with PA (63 ± 13 ml/m² vs. 82 ± 15 ml/m²; p < 0.0001). Intracellular mass index increased with BP across groups (BG: 36 [IQR: 29 to 41]; HS: 40 [IQR: 36 to 46]; HTN: 51 [IQR: 42 to 54]; PA: 50 [IQR: 46 to 67]; p < 0.0001). Extracellular mass index was similar in BG, HS, and HTN (16 [IQR: 12 to 20]; 15 [IQR: 11 to 18]; and 14 [IQR: 12 to 17], respectively) but 30% higher in PA (21 [IQR: 18 to 29]; p < 0.0001) remaining significant after adjustment for mean BP.ConclusionsOnly primary pathological aldosterone excess combined with high BP increased both extracellular myocardial matrix and intracellular mass. Secondary aldosterone excess with normal BP did not affect extracellular myocardial matrix. (Study of Myocardial Interstitial Fibrosis in Hyperaldosteronism; NCT02938910).     

Incidence,prevalence, and predictors of treatment‐resistant hypertension with intensive blood pressure lowering

Recent guidelines call for more intensive blood pressure (BP)‐lowering and a less‐stringent treatment‐resistant hypertension (TRH) definition, both of which may increase the occurrence of this high‐risk phenotype. We performed a post hoc analysis of 11 784 SPRINT and ACCORD‐BP participants without baseline TRH, who were randomized to an intensive (<120 mm Hg) or standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic BP target. Incidence, prevalence, and predictors of TRH were compared using the updated definition (requiring ≥4 drugs to achieve BP < 130/80 mm Hg) during intensive treatment, vs the former definition (requiring ≥4 drugs to achieve BP < 140/90 mm Hg) during standard treatment. Incidence/prevalence of apparent refractory hypertension (RFH; uncontrolled BP despite ≥5 drugs) was similarly compared. Overall, 5702 and 6082 patients were included in the intensive and standard treatment cohorts, respectively. Crude TRH incidence using the updated definition under intensive treatment was 30.3 (95% CI, 29.3‐31.4) per 100 patient‐years, compared with 9.7 (95% CI, 9.2‐10.2) using the prior definition under standard treatment. Point prevalence using the prior TRH definition at 1‐year was 7.5% in SPRINT and 14% in ACCORD vs 22% and 36%, respectively, with the updated TRH definition. Significant predictors of incident TRH included number of baseline antihypertensive drugs, having diabetes, baseline systolic BP, and Black race. Incidence of apparent RFH was also significantly greater using the updated vs prior definition (4.5 vs 1.0 per 100 person‐years). Implementation of the 2017 hypertension guideline, including lower BP goals for most individuals, is expected to substantially increase treatment burden and incident TRH among the hypertensive population.     

Blood pressure–lowering efficacy of indapamide SR/amlodipine combination in older patients with hypertension: A post hoc analysis of the NESTOR trial (Natrilix SR vs Enalapril in Hypertensive Type 2 Diabetics With Microalbuminuria)

To examine the antihypertensive efficacy and safety of indapamide sustained‐release (SR)/amlodipine compared with enalapril/amlodipine in patients 65 years and older with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) on monotherapy, a post hoc analysis of the NESTOR trial (Natrilix SR vs Enalapril in Hypertensive Type 2 Diabetics With Microalbuminuria) was conducted. NESTOR randomized 570 patients (n=197, aged ≥65 years) with hypertension (systolic BP 140–180/diastolic BP <110 mm Hg) to indapamide SR 1.5 mg or enalapril 10 mg. If target BP (<140/85 mm Hg) was not achieved at 6 weeks, amlodipine 5 mg was added with uptitration to 10 mg if required. A total of 107 patients aged 65 years and older received dual therapy (53 indapamide SR/amlodipine and 54 enalapril/amlodipine). Amlodipine uptitration occurred in 22 and 24 patients, respectively. At 52 weeks, mean systolic BP (±SE) reduction was significantly greater with indapamide SR/amlodipine vs enalapril/amlodipine 6.2±2.7 mm Hg (P=.02). Indapamide SR/amlodipine was also associated with a greater BP response rate (88% vs 75%, respectively). Both regimens were well tolerated. Indapamide SR/amlodipine may be more effective than enalapril/amlodipine for lowering systolic BP in patients with hypertension aged 65 years and older.     

Enhanced Blood Pressure–Lowering Effect of Olmesartan in Hypertensive Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease–Associated Sympathetic Hyperactivity: HONEST Study

To investigate the blood pressure (BP)–lowering effect of olmesartan in relation to chronic kidney disease (CKD)–associated sympathetic nerve activity, a subanalysis was performed using data from the first 16 weeks of the Home BP Measurement With Olmesartan‐Naive Patients to Establish Standard Target Blood Pressure (HONEST) study, a prospective observational study of hypertensive patients. Essential hypertensive patients who took no antihypertensive agent at baseline were classified based on baseline morning home systolic BP (MHSBP) in quartiles. In each class, patients were further classified based on baseline morning home pulse rate (MHPR). A subgroup analysis in patients with/without chronic kidney disease (CKD) was performed. A total of 5458 patients (mean age, 63.0 years; 51.6% women) were included. In the 4th quartile of baseline MHSBP (≥165 mm Hg), patients with MHPR ≥70 beats per minute had a greater BP reduction (by 3.2 mm Hg) than those with MHPR <70 beats per minute after 16 weeks of olmesartan‐based treatment (P=.0005). An even greater BP reduction (by 6.6 mm Hg) was observed in patients with CKD than in patients without CKD in this group (P=.0084). Olmesartan was more effective in hypertensive patients with high MHSBP and MHPR ≥70 beats per minute, especially in patients with CKD. Olmesartan may have enhanced BP‐lowering effects by improving renal ischemia in hypertensive CKD patients with potential increased sympathetic nerve activity.     

High prevalence of masked uncontrolled morning hypertension in elderly non‐valvular atrial fibrillation patients: Home blood pressure substudy of the ANAFIE Registry

In the ANAFIE Registry home blood pressure subcohort, we evaluated 5204 patients aged ≥75 years with non‐valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) to assess blood pressure (BP) control, prevalence of masked hypertension, and anticoagulant use. Mean clinic (C) and home (H) systolic/diastolic BP(SBP/DBP) was 128.5/71.3 and 127.7/72.6 mm Hg, respectively. Overall, 77.5% of patients had hypertension; of these, 27.7%, 13.4%, 23.4%, and 35.6% had well‐controlled, white coat, masked, and sustained hypertension, respectively. Masked hypertension prevalence increased with diabetes, decreased renal function, age ≥80 years, current smoker status, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. By morning/evening average, 59.0% of patients had mean H‐SBP ≥ 125 mm Hg; 48.9% had mean C‐SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg. Early morning hypertension (morning H‐SBP ≥ 125 mm Hg) was found in 65.9% of patients. Although 51.1% of patients had well‐controlled C‐SBP, 52.5% of these had uncontrolled morning H‐SBP. In elderly NVAF patients, morning H‐BP was poorly controlled, and masked uncontrolled morning hypertension remains significant.     

Similar Blood Pressure Values Across Racial and Economic Groups: Baseline Data from a Group Randomized Clinical Trial

This paper examines baseline characteristics from a prospective, cluster‐randomized trial in 32 primary care offices. Offices were first stratified by percentage of minorities and level of clinical pharmacy services and then randomized into 1 of 3 study groups. The only differences between randomized arms were for marital status (P=.03) and type of insurance coverage (P<.001). Blood pressures (BPs) were similar in Caucasians and minority patients, primarily blacks, who were hypertensive at baseline. On multivariate analyses, patients who were 65 years and older had higher systolic BP (152.4±14.3 mm Hg), but lower diastolic BP (77.3±11.8 mm Hg) compared with those younger than 65 years (147.4±15.0/88.6±10.6 mm Hg, P<.001 for both systolic and diastolic BP). Other factors significantly associated with higher systolic BP were a longer duration of hypertension (P=.04) and lower basal metabolic index (P=.011). Patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease had a lower systolic BP than those without these conditions (P<.0001). BP was similar across racial and socioeconomic groups for patients with uncontrolled hypertension in primary care, suggesting that patients with uncontrolled hypertension and an established primary care relationship likely have different reasons for poor BP control than other patient populations.     

Nocturnal blood pressure patterns and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with masked hypertension

Masked hypertension (MHT) is characterized by normal clinic and above normal 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) levels. We evaluated clinical characteristics and CV outcomes of different nocturnal patterns of MHT. We analyzed data derived from a large cohort of adult individuals, who consecutively underwent home, clinic, and ambulatory BP monitoring at our Hypertension Unit between January 2007 and December 2016. MHT was defined as clinic BP <140/90 mm Hg and 24‐hour BP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg, and stratified into three groups according to dipping status: (a) dippers, (b) nondippers, and (c) reverse dippers. From an overall sample of 6695 individuals, we selected 2628 (46.2%) adult untreated individuals, among whom 153 (5.0%) had MHT. In this group, 67 (43.8%) were nondippers, 65 (42.5%) dippers, and 21 (13.7%) reverse dippers. No significant differences were found among groups regarding demographics, clinical characteristics, and prevalence of risk factors, excluding older age in reverse dippers compared to other groups (P < 0.001). Systolic BP levels were significantly higher in reverse dippers than in other groups at both 24‐hour (135.6 ± 8.5 vs 130.4 ± 6.0 vs 128.2 ± 6.8 mm Hg, respectively; P < 0.001) and nighttime periods (138.2 ± 9.1 vs 125.0 ± 6.3 vs 114.5 ± 7.7 mm Hg; P < 0.001). Reverse dipping was associated with a significantly higher risk of stroke, even after correction for age, gender, BMI, dyslipidemia, and diabetes (OR 18.660; 95% IC [1.056‐33.813]; P = 0.046). MHT with reverse dipping status was associated with higher burden of BP and relatively high risk of stroke compared to both dipping and nondipping profiles, although a limited number of CV outcomes have been recorded during the follow‐up.     

Systolic blood pressure increases in patients with atrial fibrillation regaining sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion

Direct current (DC) cardioversion is used to convert persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) to sinus rhythm (SR), but there is limited knowledge about how blood pressure (BP) is affected by conversion to SR. We sought to evaluate how BP changed in AF patients who converted to SR, compared to patients still in AF. In this retrospective registry analysis, we included a total of 487 patients, treated with DC cardioversion for persistent AF. We obtained data regarding medical history, medication, BP, and electrocardiogram the day before and 7 days after cardioversion. Systolic BP increased by 9 (±16) mm Hg (P < 0.01) and diastolic BP decreased by 3 (±9) mm Hg (P < 0.01) after conversion to SR. In the group of patients with restored SR, there was a 40% increase in the proportion of patients with a hypertensive BP level (≥140/90 mm Hg) after DC cardioversion compared to before. Patients still in AF had no significant change in BP. Systolic BP increases and diastolic BP slightly decreases when persistent AF is converted to SR. The underlying mechanisms explaining these findings are not known, but may involve either hemodynamic changes that occur when SR is restored, an underestimation of systolic BP in AF, or a combination of both. Our findings suggest that an increased attention to BP levels after a successful cardioversion is warranted.     

Acute Effects of an Oral Nitric Oxide Supplement on Blood Pressure,Endothelial Function,and Vascular Compliance in Hypertensive Patients

This blinded placebo‐controlled crossover study evaluated the acute effects of an orally disintegrating lozenge that generates nitric oxide (NO) in the oral cavity on blood pressure (BP) response, endothelial function, and vascular compliance in unmedicated hypertensive patients. Thirty patients with clinical hypertension were recruited and enrolled in a blinded placebo‐controlled clinical trial in an outpatient setting. Average baseline BP in 30 patients was 144±3/91±1 mm Hg. NO supplementation resulted in a significant decrease of 4 mm Hg in resting systolic BP (P<.003) and a significant decrease of 5 mm Hg in diastolic BP (P<.002) from baseline and placebo after 20 minutes. In addition, there was a further statistically significant reduction by 6 mm Hg in both systolic and diastolic pressure after 60 minutes (P<.0001 vs baseline). After a half hour of a single dose, there was a significant improvement in vascular compliance as measured by augmentation index and, after 4 hours, a statistically significant improvement in endothelial function as measured by the EndoPAT (Itamar Medical, Franklin, MA). A single administration of an oral active NO supplement appears to acutely lower BP, improve vascular compliance, and restore endothelial function in patients with hypertension.     

Impact of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring on Reclassification of Hypertension Prevalence and Control in Older People in Spain

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) accurately classifies blood pressure (BP) status but its impact on the prevalence and control of hypertension is little known. The authors conducted a cross‐sectional study in 2012 among 1047 individuals 60 years and older from the follow‐up of a population cohort in Spain. Three casual BP measurements and 24‐hour ABPM were performed under standardized conditions. Approximately 68.8% patients were hypertensive based on casual BP (≥140/90 mm Hg or current BP medication use) and 62.1% based on 24‐hour ABPM (≥130/80 mm Hg or current BP medication use) (P=.009). The proportion of patients with treatment‐eligible hypertension who met BP goals increased from 37.4% based on the casual BP target to 54.1% based on the 24‐hour BP target (absolute difference, 16.7%; P<.01). These results were consistent across alternative BP thresholds. Therefore, compared with casual BP, 24‐hour ABPM led to a reduction in the proportion of older patients recommended for hypertension treatment and a substantial increase in the proportion of those with hypertension control.     

Associations of body fat and skeletal muscle with hypertension

Hypertension is known to be associated with obesity, while its relationship to skeletal muscle, SM (SM; a marker of general health and body function), remains uncertain. We analyzed population‐based data of 22 591 men (mean age: 51.6 ± 16.9 years) and 27 845 nonpregnant women (50.6 ± 16.9 years) from Scottish Health Surveys (2003, 2008‐2011) and Health Surveys for England (2003‐2006, 2008‐2013) including 2595 non‐insulin‐ and 536 insulin‐treated diabetic patients. Compared with normotensive individuals (no hypertension history with normal systolic [SBP < 140 mm Hg] and diastolic blood pressure [DBP < 90 mm Hg]), percent body fat (BF%) was significantly higher and percent SM lower (P < 0.001) in undetected (no hypertension history with raised SBP ≥ 140 and/or DBP ≥ 90 mm Hg), controlled (hypertension history with normal BP), uncontrolled (hypertension history with raised BP), and untreated hypertension. The prevalences of hypertension within BF% quintiles were 11.8%, 24.8%, 41.4%, 56.8%, and 71.6% and SM% quintiles were 67.5%, 53.3%, 39.5%, 27.4%, and 18.5%. Compared to referent groups (lowest BF% quintile or highest SM% quintile), odds ratio (age, sex, smoking, ethnicity, country, survey year, and diabetes adjusted) for having all types of hypertension in the highest BF% quintile was 5.5 (95% confidence interval = 5.0‐5.9) and lowest SM% quintile was 2.3 (2.2‐2.5). Compared with those without diabetes, individuals with diabetes had a 2.3‐fold‐2.6‐fold greater risk of hypertension, independent of confounding factors and BF% or SM%. The associations of hypertension with BF% were higher than those with body mass index (BMI). In conclusion, both BF and SM should be considered when analyzing results from health surveys, rather than relying on BMI which does not discriminate between the two.     

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: Is it mandatory for blood pressure control in treated hypertensive patients?: Prospective observational study

Objective

Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) is superior to office blood pressure (BP) in predicting cardiovascular events. However, its use to optimise BP control in treated hypertensive patients is less well examined.

Design and method

In this observational study conducted in 899 general practitioners' offices, 4078 hypertensive patients with uncontrolled office BP were included. Antihypertensive therapy was intensified and after 1 year office BP and 24-hour ABP were measured to categorise patients according to the ESC/ESH 2007 guidelines.

Results

In this cohort (mean office BP 156/90 mm Hg, mean ABP 146/85 mm Hg), 2059 out of 4078 patients (50.5%) had controlled office BP (< 140/90 mm Hg) at 1 year examination. Of these apparently controlled patients (N = 2059), 1339 (65.8%) had 24-hour ABP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg, indicating masked hypertension (32.9% of all treated patients). In the prespecified subgroups the prevalence of masked hypertension was the following: diabetes 28.2%, CVD 29.1%, and CKD 32.1%. White coat hypertension (24 h-ABP < 130/80 mm Hg and office BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg) was found in 12.4% (N = 233) of patients with elevated office BP (6.1% of all treated patients), and in 5.7% of the diabetic subgroup, 5.6% CVD and 7.1% CKD. Discrepancies in BP categorisation between office BP and 24-hour ABP were high; all subjects 52.8%, diabetes 50.0%, CVD 49.0% and CKD 50.4%.

Conclusion

In hypertensive patients on therapy, 2 out of 3 with apparently controlled office BP had masked hypertension, suggesting a more aggressive therapy, and 1 out of 8 with elevated office BP had white coat hypertension potentially falsely forcing physicians to intensify therapy.The 3A Registry is listed under clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01454583.     

Elevated Diastolic,But Not Systolic,Blood Pressure Measured in the Emergency Department Predicts Future Development of Hypertension in Normotensive Individuals

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is reported in many individuals without hypertension presenting to the emergency department (ED). Whether this condition represents a transient state or is predictive for the development of future hypertension is unknown. This observational prospective study investigated patients admitted to an ED without a diagnosis of hypertension in whom BP values were ≥140/90 mm Hg. The primary outcome was development of hypertension during follow‐up. Overall, 195 patients were recruited and at the end of follow‐up (average 30.14±15.96 months), 142 patients were diagnosed with hypertension (73%). The mean age (50±12.25 vs 48.31±13.9, P=.419) and sex distribution (78 men/64 women vs 24 men/20 women, respectively; P=.148) were similar in both groups. There were significant differences in systolic and diastolic BP between those who developed hypertension on follow‐up and those who did not (177.6 mm Hg±22.6/106.1 mm Hg±16.9 vs 168.6 mm Hg±18/95.2 mm Hg±12.2; P=.011 for systolic BP, P<.001 for diastolic BP). In multivariate analysis the only significant predictive factor for the development of hypertension was diastolic hypertension recorded in the ED (P=.03). Elevated diastolic, but not systolic, BP among patients presenting to the ED is associated with future development of hypertension in previously normotensive individuals.     

White‐coat and masked hypertension diagnoses in chronic kidney disease patients

The purpose of this study was to analyze which 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) parameters should be used on masked hypertension (MH) and white‐coat hypertension (WCH) diagnoses in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Non‐dialysis CKD patients underwent 24‐hour ABPM examination between 01/27/2004 and 02/16/2012. They were followed from the 24‐hour ABPM to January/2014 in an observational study. The WCH definitions tested were as follows: (a) office blood pressure (BP) ≥ 140/90 mm Hg and daytime ABPM BP ≤ 135/85 mm Hg (old criterion); and (b) office BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg and 24‐hour ABPM BP ≤ 130/80 mm Hg, daytime ABPM BP ≤ 135/85 mm Hg, and nighttime ABPM BP ≤ 120/70 mm Hg (new criterion). The MH definitions tested were as follows: (a) office BP < 140/90 mm Hg and daytime ABPM BP > 135/85 mm Hg (old criterion); and (b) office BP < 140/90 mm Hg and 24‐hour ABPM BP > 130/80 mm Hg or daytime ABPM BP > 135/85 mm Hg or nighttime ABPM BP > 120/70 mm Hg (new criterion). The two definitions' predictive capacity was compared, regarding both WCH and MH. Cardiovascular mortality was the primary and all‐cause mortality was the secondary outcome. Cox regression was adjusted to the variables: glomerular filtration rate, age, diabetes mellitus, and active smoking. There were 367 patients studied. The old criterion (exclusive mean daytime ABPM BP) was the only to distinguish sustained hypertension from WCH (adjusted HR: 3.730; 95% CI: 1.068‐13.029; P = .039), regarding all‐cause mortality. Additionally, the old criterion was the only one to distinguish normotension and MH, regarding cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR: 7.641; 95% CI: 1.277‐45.738; P = .026). Therefore, WCH and MH definitions based exclusively on daytime ABPM BP values (old criterion) were able to better distinguish mortality in this studied CKD cohort.