Intradialytic Hypertension and the Association with Interdialytic Ambulatory Blood Pressure

Summary

Background and objectives

Increasing BP during maintenance hemodialysis or intradialytic hypertension is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. In hemodialysis patients, ambulatory BP measurements predict adverse cardiovascular outcomes better than in-center measurements. We hypothesized that patients with intradialytic hypertension have higher interdialytic ambulatory systolic BP than those without intradialytic hypertension.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

We performed a case-control study in adult hemodialysis patients. Cases consisted of subjects with intradialytic-hypertension (systolic BP increase ≥10 mmHg from pre- to posthemodialysis in at least four of six treatments), and controls were subjects with ≥10 mmHg decreases from pre- to posthemodialysis in at least four of six treatments. The primary outcome was mean interdialytic 44-hour systolic ambulatory BP.

Results

Fifty subjects with a mean age of 54.5 years were enrolled (25 per group) among whom 80% were men, 86% diabetic, 62% Hispanic, and 38% African American. The mean prehemodialysis systolic BP for the intradialytic-hypertension and control groups were 144.0 and 155.5 mmHg, respectively. Mean posthemodialysis systolic BP was 159.0 and 128.1 mmHg, for the intradialytic-hypertension and control groups, respectively. The mean systolic ambulatory BP was 155.4 and 142.4 mmHg for the intradialytic-hypertension and control groups, respectively (P = 0.005). Both daytime and nocturnal systolic BP were higher among those with intradialytic hypertension as compared with controls. There was no difference in interdialytic weight gain between groups.

Conclusions

Time-integrated BP burden as measured by 44-hour ambulatory BP is higher in hemodialysis patients with intradialytic hypertension than those without intradialytic hypertension.     

Masked Hypertension and Elevated Nighttime Blood Pressure in CKD: Prevalence and Association with Target Organ Damage

Background and objectives

Masked hypertension and elevated nighttime BP are associated with increased risk of hypertensive target organ damage and adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with normal kidney function. The significance of masked hypertension for these risks in patients with CKD is less well defined. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between masked hypertension and kidney function and markers of cardiovascular target organ damage, and to determine whether this relationship was consistent among those with and without elevated nighttime BP.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

This was a cross-sectional study. We performed 24-hour ambulatory BP in 1492 men and women with CKD enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort Study. We categorized participants into controlled BP, white-coat, masked, and sustained hypertension on the basis of clinic and 24-hour ambulatory BP. We obtained echocardiograms and measured pulse wave velocity in 1278 and 1394 participants, respectively.

Results

The percentages of participants with controlled BP, white-coat, masked, and sustained hypertension were 49.3%, 4.1%, 27.8%, and 18.8%, respectively. Compared with controlled BP, masked hypertension independently associated with low eGFR (−3.2 ml/min per 1.73 m²; 95% confidence interval, −5.5 to −0.9), higher proteinuria (+0.9 unit higher in log₂ urine protein; 95% confidence interval, 0.7 to 1.1), and higher left ventricular mass index (+2.52 g/m^2.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.9 to 4.1), and pulse wave velocity (+0.92 m/s; 95% confidence interval, 0.5 to 1.3). Participants with masked hypertension had lower eGFR only in the presence of elevated nighttime BP (−3.6 ml/min per 1.73 m²; 95% confidence interval, −6.1 to −1.1; versus −1.4 ml/min per 1.73 m²; 95% confidence interval, −6.9 to 4.0, among those with nighttime BP <120/70 mmHg; P value for interaction with nighttime systolic BP 0.002).

Conclusions

Masked hypertension is common in patients with CKD and associated with lower eGFR, proteinuria, and cardiovascular target organ damage. In patients with CKD, ambulatory BP characterizes the relationship between BP and target organ damage better than BP measured in the clinic alone.     

Blood Pressure Monitoring Technique Impacts Hypertension Treatment

BACKGROUND

In 2005 the American Heart Association (AHA) released updated recommendations for blood pressure (BP) monitoring in order to ensure accurate BP measurements.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if current methods of BP assessment in an ambulatory clinic result in significantly different BP measurements than those obtained by following the AHA recommendations and if these BP differences impact treatment decisions.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Randomized prospective analysis.

SETTING

University of New Mexico Hospital Adult Internal Medicine clinic.

PATIENTS

Forty adults with hypertension

METHODS

Patient BPs were measured using both the traditional triage method and the AHA-recommended method in cross-over fashion in random order. Two complete medical profile summaries were then constructed for each patient: one for each BP measurement obtained by each technique. These profiles were then reviewed by a panel of providers who provided hypothetical hypertension treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

Individual BP results varied greatly between the two methods. SBP readings differed by ≥5 mmHg in either direction for 68% of patients while 78% of patient’s DBP readings differed by ≥2 mmHg in either direction. Overall, 93% of patients had a BP difference of either ≥5 mmHg systolic or ≥2 mmHg diastolic. Five patients were determined to be at goal with the triage method, but were higher than their goal BP with the AHA method Significant differences were also seen in treatment recommendations for a given patient based on the differences seen between the two obtained BP readings. The number of patients with treatment variations between their two profiles ranged from 13% to 23% depending on the reviewing provider (p < 0.01 for all providers).

CONCLUSION

Inaccurate BP assessment is common and may impact hypertension treatment decisions.KEY WORDS: blood pressure measurement, hypertension     

Intradialytic Hypertension and its Association with Endothelial Cell Dysfunction

Summary

Background and objectives

Intradialytic hypertension is associated with adverse outcomes, yet the mechanism is uncertain. Patients with intradialytic hypertension exhibit imbalances in endothelial-derived vasoregulators nitric oxide and endothelin-1, indirectly suggesting endothelial cell dysfunction. We hypothesized that intradialytic hypertension is associated in vivo with endothelial cell dysfunction, a novel predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes.

Design, settings, participants, & measurements

We performed a case-control cohort study including 25 hemodialysis (HD) subjects without (controls) and 25 with intradialytic hypertension (an increase in systolic BP pre- to postdialysis ≥10 mmHg ≥4/6 consecutive HD sessions). The primary outcome was peripheral blood endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) assessed by aldehyde dehydrogenase activity (ALDH^br) and cell surface marker expression (CD34⁺CD133⁺). We also assessed endothelial function by ultrasonographic measurement of brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) normalized for shear stress. Parametric and nonparametric t tests were used to compare EPCs, FMD, and BP.

Results

Baseline characteristics and comorbidities were similar between groups. Compared with controls, 2-week average predialysis systolic BP was lower among subjects with intradialytic hypertension (144.0 versus 155.5 mmHg), but postdialysis systolic BP was significantly higher (159.0 versus 128.1 mmHg). Endothelial cell function was impaired among subjects with intradialytic hypertension as measured by decreased median ALDH^br cells and decreased CD34⁺CD133⁺ cells (ALDH^br, 0.034% versus 0.053%; CD34⁺CD133⁺, 0.033% versus 0.059%). FMD was lower among subjects with intradialytic hypertension (1.03% versus 1.67%).

Conclusions

Intradialytic hypertension is associated with endothelial cell dysfunction. We propose that endothelial cell dysfunction may partially explain the higher event rates observed in these patients.     

The Role of Out-of-Clinic Blood Pressure Measurements in Preventing Hypertension

Purpose of Review

One of the possible strategies for preventing hypertension is identifying high-risk people and then implementing lifestyle modifications or therapeutic interventions. Out-of-clinic blood pressure measurements, either home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, may identify people with early blood pressure elevation or white-coat or masked hypertension and potentially help prevent hypertension. In this review, we will summarize the evidence on the role of out-of-clinic blood pressure measurements in preventing hypertension either from prehypertension or high normal or elevated blood pressure, or from white-coat or masked hypertension.

Recent Findings

Early blood pressure elevation, either termed as prehypertension or as high normal or elevated blood pressure, identified by home blood pressure monitoring was associated with a 3- to 5-fold risk of sustained hypertension. White-coat and masked hypertension, identified by either home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, was associated with a 2- to 4-fold risk of sustained hypertension.

Summary

Out-of-office blood pressure measurements may potentially help prevent hypertension. However, to prove reversibility, controlled clinical trials are required.

     

Increasing the doses of both diuretics and angiotensin receptor blockers is beneficial in subjects with uncontrolled systolic hypertension

BACKGROUND:

Blood pressure (BP) control is frequently difficult to achieve in patients with predominantly elevated systolic BP. Consequently, these patients frequently require combination therapy including a thiazide diuretic such as hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and an agent blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Current clinical practice usually limits the daily dose of HCTZ to 25 mg. This often leads to the necessity of using additional antihypertensive agents to control BP in a high proportion of patients.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare the efficacy of two doses of losartan (LOS)/HCTZ combinations in patients with uncontrolled ambulatory systolic hypertension after six weeks of treatment with LOS 100 mg/HCTZ 25 mg (LOS100/HCTZ25).

METHODS:

Following a two- to four-week washout period, subjects with a mean clinic sitting systolic BP of 160 mmHg or higher and a mean ambulatory daytime systolic BP (MDSBP) of 135 mmHg or higher on LOS100/HCTZ25 (n=105; 33 women and 72 men) were randomly assigned to receive LOS 150 mg/HCTZ 25 mg (group 1; n=53) or LOS 150 mg/HCTZ 37.5 mg (LOS150/HCTZ37.5, group 2; n=52). The primary end point was the difference in MDSBP reductions.

RESULTS:

At the end of the six-week treatment period, the respective additional decreases in MDSBP were 1.2 mmHg (P=0.335) on LOS 150 mg/HCTZ 25 mg and 5.6 mmHg (P<0.0001) on LOS150/HCTZ37.5 (difference of 4.4 mmHg; P=0.011). Daytime systolic ambulatory BP goal (lower than 130 mmHg) achievement tended to be higher (25% versus 17%; P=0.313) with LOS150/HCTZ37.5, while it was significantly higher (65% versus 43%; P=0.024) for mean daytime diastolic BP (lower than 80 mmHg). No deleterious metabolic changes were observed.

CONCLUSIONS:

In patients with uncontrolled systolic ambulatory hypertension receiving LOS100/HCTZ25, increasing both HCTZ and LOS dosages simultaneously to LOS150/HCTZ37.5 may be an effective strategy that does not affect metabolic parameters.     

Enhancing hypertension awareness and management in the elderly: lessons learned from the Airdrie Community Hypertension Awareness and Management Program (A-CHAMP)

BACKGROUND:

High blood pressure (BP) is an established and modifiable cardiovascular risk factor; however, awareness and management of this primarily asymptomatic disease remains suboptimal.

OBJECTIVES:

The Airdrie Community Hypertension Awareness and Management Program (A-CHAMP) was a community-based BP program for seniors designed to improve public and health care provider awareness and management of hypertension.

METHODS:

Volunteer peer health educators (VPHEs) were recruited from the community and trained to manage BP screening sessions in local pharmacies. Airdrie (Alberta) residents 65 years of age and older were invited by their family physicians (FPs) to attend the A-CHAMP sessions. VPHEs identified participants’ cardiovascular risk factors, assessed BP with a validated automated device and implemented a management algorithm. Participants with BP higher than 159/99 mmHg were directed to their pharmacists and FPs. All participants with elevated BP at the initial A-CHAMP session were invited to return to a follow-up session four to six months later.

RESULTS:

Thirty VPHEs were recruited and trained. All 15 FPs and all six pharmacies in Airdrie participated. VPHEs assessed 406 seniors (approximately 40% of Airdrie seniors) during the three-month program. One hundred forty-eight participants (36.5%) had elevated BP at their first session. Of these, 71% returned for the follow-up session four to six months later. The mean (± SD) systolic BP decreased by 16.9±17.2 mmHg (P<0.05, n=105) compared with their first visit, and 56% of participants (59 of 105) reached Canadian targets for BP.

CONCLUSIONS:

A-CHAMP raised awareness, and identified and managed seniors with hypertension. At follow-up, BP showed statistically and clinically significant and sustained improvement. Participating health care providers and VPHEs indicated that A-CHAMP was effective and feasible in improving awareness and control of hypertension.     

Treatment and blood pressure control in 47,964 people with diabetes and hypertension: a systematic review of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Many patients with diabetes also have hypertension, greatly increasing their risk for cardiovascular disease. It has been suggested that hypertension is poorly treated in those with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine treatment and control of hypertension in people with diabetes.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthSTAR, CINAHL, Web of Science, clinical evidence and government health and statistical Web sites.

METHOD

Databases were systematically reviewed and hand searches of the bibliographies of relevant studies (1990 to 2004) were conducted. Two investigators selected studies and extracted the data independently.

RESULTS

A total of 44 studies (77,649 subjects with diabetes, 47,964 [62%] of whom also had hypertension) were included. While 83% (range 32% to 100%) of patients with hypertension received drug therapy, only 12% (range 6% to 30%) had their blood pressure (BP) controlled to 130/85 mmHg or less. While BP control rates differed by definition of control (those studies with the least stringent definitions for BP control – 160/90 mmHg or less – reported mean control rates of 37%), treatment and control rates did not differ appreciably between countries or health care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than one in eight people with diabetes and hypertension have adequately controlled BP, with remarkable uniformity across studies conducted in a variety of settings. There is an urgent need for multidisciplinary, community-based approaches to manage these high-risk patients.     

Successful treatment of hypertension accounts for improvements in markers of diastolic function − a pilot study comparing hydrochlorothiazide-based and amlodipine-based treatment strategies

BACKGROUND:

There is controversy regarding whether blood pressure (BP) medications have relevant therapeutic benefits beyond those due to lowering of BP.

OBJECTIVE:

To show that rapid successful treatment of hypertension leads to improvement in cardiac morphology and function regardless of the pharmacological agents used.

METHODS:

Hypertension was defined as an average 24 h ambulatory BP of higher than 135/85 mmHg in 38 subjects with a mean (± SD) age of 54±7 years. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with a diuretic-based (n=20) or a calcium channel blocker (CCB)-based (n=18) medication. All subjects were followed every two weeks, and similar additional medications were added until the BP was lower than 125/80 mmHg, then followed monthly for a total of six months. Echocardiography with tissue Doppler imaging was performed, and was repeated after six months of aggressive pharmacotherapy and lifestyle management.

RESULTS:

Baseline ambulatory BP monitoring and echocardiographic measures of diastolic function were similar between both treatment groups. Subjects received 3.5±1 pills and 11±2 follow-up visits. The average 24 h BP was reduced from 145/91 mmHg to 124/75 mmHg (P<0.001) in the CCB group. A greater lowering from 143/91 mmHg to 117/72 mmHg occurred in the diuretic group (P=0.02 for the difference between groups) at six months. There was significant improvement in tissue Doppler imaging diastolic function parameters in both groups, with a trend toward greater improvement in the diuretic group. The left ventricular mass/height^2.7 index decreased from 40 g/m^2.7 to 37 g/m^2.7 in the diuretic group (P=0.02), whereas a nonsignificant change (41 g/m^2.7 to 42 g/m^2.7) occurred in the CCB group.

CONCLUSIONS:

Aggressive BP lowering is associated with improved left ventricular diastolic function and mass proportional to the extent of BP normalization.     

Role Of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in Resistance to Drug Therapy in Patients with Resistant Hypertension

Background

Despite the increased evidence of the important role of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-9 and MMP‑2) in the pathophysiology of hypertension, the profile of these molecules in resistant hypertension (RHTN) remains unknown.

Objectives

To compare the plasma levels of MMP-9 and MMP-2 and of their tissue inhibitors (TIMP-1 and TIMP-2, respectively), as well as their MMP-9/TIMP-1 and MMP-2/TIMP-2 ratios, between patients with controlled RHTN (CRHTN, n=41) and uncontrolled RHTN (UCRHTN, n=35). In addition, the association of those parameters with clinical characteristics, office blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness (determined by pulse wave velocity) was evaluate in those subgroups.

Methods

This study included 76 individuals diagnosed with RHTN and submitted to physical examination, electrocardiogram, and laboratory tests to assess biochemical parameters.

Results

Similar values of MMP-9, MMP-2, TIMP-1, TIMP-2, and MMP-9/TIMP-1 and MMP-2/TIMP-2 ratios were found in the UCRHTN and CRHTN subgroups (P>0.05). A significant correlation was found between diastolic BP (DBP) and MMP-9/TIMP-1 ratio (r=0.37; P=0.02) and DPB and MMP-2 (r=-0.40; P=0.02) in the UCRHTN subgroup. On the other hand, no correlation was observed in the CRHTN subgroup. Logistic regression models demonstrated that MMP-9, MMP-2, TIMP-1, TIMP-2 and their ratios were not associated with the lack of BP control.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that neither MMP-2 nor MMP-9 affect BP control in RHTN subjects.     

Effect of Lisinopril and Atenolol on Aortic Stiffness in Patients on Hemodialysis

Background and objectives

Whether improvements in arterial compliance with BP lowering are because of BP reduction alone or if pleiotropic effects of antihypertensive agents contribute remains unclear. It was hypothesized that, among patients on hemodialysis, compared with a β-blocker (atenolol), a lisinopril-based therapy will better reduce arterial stiffness.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

Among 200 participants of the Hypertension in Hemodialysis Patients Treated with Atenolol or Lisinopril Trial, 179 patients with valid assessment of aortic pulse wave velocity at baseline (89 patients randomly assigned to open-label lisinopril and 90 patients randomly assigned to atenolol three times a week after dialysis) were included in the secondary analysis. Among them, 109 patients had a valid pulse wave velocity measurement at 6 months. Monthly measured home BP was targeted to <140/90 mmHg by addition of antihypertensive drugs and dry weight adjustment. The difference between drugs in percentage change of aortic pulse wave velocity from baseline to 6 months was analyzed.

Results

Contrary to the hypothesis, atenolol-based treatment induced greater reduction in aortic pulse wave velocity relative to lisinopril (between drug difference, 14.8%; 95% confidence interval, 1.5% to 28.5%; P=0.03). Reduction in 44-hour ambulatory systolic and diastolic BP was no different between groups (median [25th, 75th percentile]; atenolol: −21.5 [−37.7, −7.6] versus lisinopril: −15.8 [−28.8, −1.5] mmHg; P=0.27 for systolic BP; −14.1 [−22.6, −5.3] versus −10.9 [−18.4, −0.9] mmHg, respectively; P=0.30 for diastolic BP). Between-drug difference in change of aortic pulse wave velocity persisted after adjustments for age, sex, race, other cardiovascular risk factors, and baseline ambulatory systolic BP but disappeared after adjustment for change in ambulatory systolic BP (11.8%; 95% confidence interval, −2.3% to 25.9%; P=0.10).

Conclusions

Among patients on dialysis, atenolol was superior in improving arterial stiffness. However, differences between atenolol and lisinopril in improving aortic stiffness among patients on hemodialysis may be explained by BP-lowering effects of drugs.     

Diagnosis and Treatment of Incident Hypertension Among Patients with Diabetes: a U.S. Multi-Disciplinary Group Practice Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Early hypertension control reduces the risk of cardiovascular complications among patients with diabetes mellitus. There is a need to improve hypertension management among patients with diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTiVE

We aimed to evaluate rates and associations of hypertension diagnosis and treatment among patients with diabetes mellitus and incident hypertension.

DESIGN

This was a 4-year retrospective analysis of electronic health records.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults ≥18 years old (n = 771) with diabetes mellitus, who met criteria for incident hypertension and received primary care at a large, Midwestern academic group practice from 2008 to 2011 were included

MAIN MEASURES

Cut-points of 130/80 and 140/90 mmHg were used to identify incident cases of hypertension. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the probability of receiving: 1) an initial hypertension diagnosis and 2) antihypertensive medication at specific time points. Cox proportional-hazard frailty models (HR; 95 % CI) were fit to identify associations of time to hypertension diagnosis and treatment.

KEY RESULTS

Among patients with diabetes mellitus who met clinical criteria for hypertension, 41 % received a diagnosis and 37 % received medication using the 130/80 mmHg cut-point. At the 140/90 mmHg cut-point, 52 % received a diagnosis and 49 % received medication. Atrial fibrillation (HR 2.18; 1.21–4.67) was associated with faster diagnosis rates; peripheral vascular disease (HR 0.18; 0.04–0.74) and fewer primary care visits (HR 0.93; 0.88–0.98) were associated with slower diagnosis rates. Atrial fibrillation (HR 3.07; 1.39–6.74) and ischemic heart disease/congestive heart failure (HR 2.16; 1.24–3.76) were associated with faster treatment rates; peripheral vascular disease (HR 0.16; 0.04–0.64) and fewer visits (HR 0.93; 0.88–0.98) predicted slower medication initiation. Diagnosis and treatment of incident hypertension were similar using cut-points of 130/80 and 140/90 mmHg.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with diabetes mellitus, even using a cut-point of 140/90 mmHg, approximately 50 % remained undiagnosed and untreated for hypertension. Future interventions should target patients with multiple comorbidities to improve hypertension and diabetes clinical care.KEY WORDS: hypertension, diabetes mellitus, diagnosis, electronic health records     

Effect of Exercise on Blood Pressure in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Increased blood pressure (BP) in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) markedly increases cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality risk compared to having increased BP alone.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether exercise reduces suboptimal levels of untreated suboptimal BP or treated hypertension.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized controlled trial for 6 months.

SETTING

Single center in Baltimore, MD, USA.

PATIENTS

140 participants with T2DM not requiring insulin and untreated SBP of 120–159 or DBP of 85–99 mmHg, or, if being treated for hypertension, any SBP <159 mmHg or DBP < 99 mmHg; 114 completed the study.

INTERVENTION

Supervised exercise, 3 times per week for 6 months compared with general advice about physical activity.

MEASUREMENTS

Resting SBP and DBP (primary outcome); diabetes status, arterial stiffness assessed as carotid-femoral pulse-wave velocity (PWV), body composition and fitness (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

Overall baseline BP was 126.8 ± 13.5 / 71.7 ± 9.0 mmHg, with no group differences. At 6 months, BP was unchanged from baseline in either group, BP 125.8 ± 13.2 / 70.7 ± 8.8 mmHg in controls; and 126.0 ± 14.2 / 70.3 ± 9.0 mmHg in exercisers, despite attaining a training effects as evidenced by increased aerobic and strength fitness and lean mass and reduced fat mass (all p < 0.05), Overall baseline PWV was 959.9 ± 333.1 cm/s, with no group difference. At 6-months, PWV did not change and was not different between group; exercisers, 923.7 ± 319.8 cm/s, 905.5 ± 344.7, controls.

LIMITATIONS

A completion rate of 81 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Though exercisers improve fitness and body composition, there were no reductions in BP. The lack of change in arterial stiffness suggests a resistance to exercise-induced BP reduction in persons with T2DM.KEY WORDS: exercise training, diabetes, high blood pressure, randomized trial     

Aliskiren in Combination with Losartan Reduces Albuminuria Independent of Baseline Blood Pressure in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy

Summary

Background and objectives

Elevated BP contributes to development and progression of proteinuria and decline in renal function in patients with type 2 diabetes. Our post hoc analysis assessed the baseline BP influence on the antiproteinuric effect in the Aliskiren in the Evaluation of Proteinuria in Diabetes (AVOID) study.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

In the AVOID study, 599 hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy received 6 months of aliskiren (150 mg force titrated to 300 mg daily after 3 months) or placebo added to losartan (100 mg) daily and optimal antihypertensive therapy. Changes in early morning urinary albumin:creatinine ratio and eGFR at week 24 were assessed by subgroups of baseline BP: Group A (prespecified target), <130/80 mmHg (n = 159); Group B, <140/90 mmHg but ≥130/80 mmHg (n = 189); and Group C (insufficient BP control), ≥140/90 mmHg (n = 251).

Results

Mean baseline BP (mmHg) levels for Groups A, B, and C were 120/71, 133/78, and 145/81, respectively. BP during the trial was nearly identical to baseline levels in all groups. The antiproteinuric effects of aliskiren were consistent across subgroups of baseline BP (19 to 22% reduction versus placebo). In Group C, the decline in eGFR was significantly lower with aliskiren than with placebo (P = 0.013).

Conclusions

Aliskiren (300 mg) added to losartan (100 mg) plus optimal antihypertensive therapy provides antiproteinuric effects independent of BP in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Renal function was better preserved with aliskiren in patients with insufficient BP control.     

Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Patients in the "Hiperdia Program": A Territory-Based Study

Background

Systemic hypertension is highly prevalent and an important risk factor for cardiovascular events. Blood pressure control in hypertensive patients enrolled in the Hiperdia Program, a program of the Single Health System for the follow-up and monitoring of hypertensive patients, is still far below the desired level.

Objective

To describe the epidemiological profile and to assess blood pressure control of patients enrolled in Hiperdia, in the city of Novo Hamburgo (State of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil).

Methods

Cross-sectional study with a stratified cluster random sample, including 383 adults enrolled in the Hiperdia Program of the 15 Basic Health Units of the city of Porto Alegre, conducted between 2010 and 2011. Controlled blood pressure was defined as ≤140 mmHg × 90 mmHg. The hypertensive patients were interviewed and their blood pressure was measured using a calibrated aneroid device. Prevalence ratios (PR) with 95% confidence interval, Wald''s χ² test, and simple and multiple Poisson regression were used in the statistical analysis.

Results

The mean age was 63 ± 10 years, and most of the patients were females belonging to social class C, with a low level of education, a sedentary lifestyle, and family history positive for systemic hypertension. Diabetes mellitus (DM) was observed in 31%; adherence to the antihypertensive treatment in 54.3%; and 33.7% had their blood pressure controlled. DM was strongly associated with inadequate BP control, with only 15.7% of the diabetics showing BP considered as controlled.

Conclusion

Even for hypertensive patients enrolled in the Hiperdia Program, BP control is not satisfactorily reached or sustained. Diabetic hypertensive patients show the most inappropriate BP control.     

A Successful Multifaceted Trial to Improve Hypertension Control in Primary Care: Why Did it Work?

Background

It is important to understand which components of successful multifaceted interventions are responsible for study outcomes, since some components may be more important contributors to the intervention effect than others.

Objective

We conducted a mediation analysis to determine which of seven factors had the greatest effect on change in systolic blood pressure (BP) after 6 months in a trial to improve hypertension control.

Design

The study was a preplanned secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized clinical trial. Eight clinics in an integrated health system were randomized to provide usual care to their patients (n = 222), and eight were randomized to provide a telemonitoring intervention (n = 228).

Participants

Four hundred three of 450 trial participants completing the 6-month follow-up visit were included.

Interventions

Intervention group participants received home BP telemonitors and transmitted measurements to pharmacists, who adjusted medications and provided advice to improve adherence to medications and lifestyle modification via telephone visits.

Main measures

Path analytic models estimated indirect effects of the seven potential mediators of intervention effect (defined as the difference between the intervention and usual care groups in change in systolic BP from baseline to 6 months). The potential mediators were change in home BP monitor use, number of BP medication classes, adherence to BP medications, physical activity, salt intake, alcohol use, and weight.

Key Results

The difference in change in systolic BP was 11.3 mmHg. The multivariable mediation model explained 47 % (5.3 mmHg) of the intervention effect. Nearly all of this was mediated by two factors: an increase in medication treatment intensity (24 %) and increased home BP monitor use (19 %). The other five factors were not significant mediators, although medication adherence and salt intake improved more in the intervention group than in the usual care group.

Conclusions

Most of the explained intervention effect was attributable to the combination of self-monitoring and medication intensification. High adherence at baseline and the relatively low intensity of resources directed toward lifestyle change may explain why these factors did not contribute to the improvement in BP.KEY WORDS: Blood pressure, Hypertension, Randomized trial, Mediation, Telemonitoring, Case management     

Functional Vascular Study in Hypertensive Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Using Losartan or Amlodipine

Background

Antihypertensive drugs are used to control blood pressure (BP) and reduce macro- and microvascular complications in hypertensive patients with diabetes.

Objectives

The present study aimed to compare the functional vascular changes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine or losartan.

Methods

Patients with a previous diagnosis of hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomly divided into 2 groups and evaluated after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine (5 mg/day) or losartan (100 mg/day). Patient evaluation included BP measurement, ambulatory BP monitoring, and assessment of vascular parameters using applanation tonometry, pulse wave velocity (PWV), and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery.

Results

A total of 42 patients were evaluated (21 in each group), with a predominance of women (71%) in both groups. The mean age of the patients in both groups was similar (amlodipine group: 54.9 ± 4.5 years; losartan group: 54.0 ± 6.9 years), with no significant difference in the mean BP [amlodipine group: 145 ± 14 mmHg (systolic) and 84 ± 8 mmHg (diastolic); losartan group: 153 ± 19 mmHg (systolic) and 90 ± 9 mmHg (diastolic)]. The augmentation index (30% ± 9% and 36% ± 8%, p = 0.025) and augmentation pressure (16 ± 6 mmHg and 20 ± 8 mmHg, p = 0.045) were lower in the amlodipine group when compared with the losartan group. PWV and FMD were similar in both groups.

Conclusions

Hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with amlodipine exhibited an improved pattern of pulse wave reflection in comparison with those treated with losartan. However, the use of losartan may be associated with independent vascular reactivity to the pressor effect.     

Prognostic Importance of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Resistant Hypertension: Is It All that Matters?

Purpose of Review

This article reviews the current knowledge on the prognostic importance of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring parameters in patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension.

Recent Findings

Although mean 24-h ambulatory BPs have been consistently established as better cardiovascular risk predictors than clinic (office) BPs in several clinical settings, and ambulatory BP monitoring is generally indicated in patients with resistant hypertension; there were only five previous longitudinal prospective studies that specifically evaluated the prognostic importance of ambulatory BP monitoring parameters in resistant hypertensive patients. These studies are carefully reviewed here. In conjunction, they demonstrated that office BP levels have little, if any, prognostic value in resistant hypertensive patients. Otherwise, several ambulatory BP monitoring parameters are strong cardiovascular risk predictors, particularly nighttime sleep BPs and the non-dipping pattern. Most relevant, the ambulatory BP monitoring diagnosis of true resistant hypertension (i.e., patients with uncontrolled ambulatory BPs, either daytime or nighttime) doubled the risk of future occurrence of major cardiovascular events in contrast to patients with white-coat resistant hypertension (i.e., with controlled ambulatory BPs despite uncontrolled office BPs).

Summary

This review reinforces the pivotal role of serial ambulatory BP monitoring examinations in the clinical management of patients with resistant hypertension.

     

Relationship between epistaxis and hypertension: A cause and effect or coincidence?

Introduction

Epistaxis is the most common otorhinolaryngological emergency. Whether there is an association or cause and effect relationship between epistaxis and hypertension is a subject of longstanding controversy.

Objective

The aim of our study is to evaluate the relationship between epistaxis and hypertension.

Materials and methods

This study was conducted at Olaya Medical Center (Riyadh) during the period between May 2013 and June 2014. A total of 80 patients were divided into two groups: Group A consisted of 40 patients who presented with epistaxis, and Group B consisted of 40 patients who served as a control group. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed for all patients. Patients were followed up for a period of three months.

Results

Readings of blood pressure (BP) were similar between the two groups regarding BP at presentation, ABPM, and BP at three months. There was a higher number of attacks in patients with history of hypertension. There was highly significant positive correlation between number of attacks of epistaxis and BP readings. Systolic BP at presentation was higher in patients who needed more complex interventions such as pack, balloon or cautery than those managed by first aid.

Conclusion

We found no definite association between epistaxis and hypertension. Epistaxis was not initiated by high BP but was more difficult to control in hypertensive patients.