Beta-blockers for hypertension

Trends in Initial Antihypertensive Medication Prescribing Among >2.8 Million Veterans Newly Diagnosed With Hypertension, 2000 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Among patients diagnosed with high blood pressure (BP), initial dual therapy has been recommended for patients with high pretreatment systolic BP (≥160 mm Hg) since 2003, and first-line β-blocker use without a compelling condition has fallen out of favor in US guidelines.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This serial cross-sectional study of national Veterans Health Administration data included adult Veterans with incident hypertension initiating antihypertensive medication between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019. We assessed annual trends in initial regimens dispensed (index date: first antihypertensive dispense date) by number of classes and unique class combinations used overall and by pretreatment systolic BP (<140, 140 to <160, and ≥160 mm Hg), as well as trends in subgroups (age, sex, race and ethnicity, and comorbidities warranting β-blocker use). Among 2 832 684 eligible Veterans (average age 61 years, 95% men, 65% non-Hispanic White, and 8% with cardiovascular disease), from 2000-2004 to 2015-2019, initial monotherapy increased across all pretreatment systolic BP levels (<140 mm Hg: 62.1% to 66.4%; 140 to <160 mm Hg: 70.7% to 76.8%; ≥160 mm Hg: 64.2% to 69.7%). Initiation of dual therapy decreased across all pretreatment systolic BP levels (<140 mm Hg: 25.0% to 24.2%; 140 to <160 mm Hg: 20.4% to 17.6%; ≥160 mm Hg: 22.7% to 22.0%). Among 2 521 696 Veterans (89% of overall) without a β-blocker-indicated condition in 2015 to 2019, 20% initiated a β-blocker, most commonly as monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of US Veterans diagnosed with hypertension with a pretreatment systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg were started on antihypertensive monotherapy. There are disparities between guideline-recommended first-line treatments and the actual regimens initiated for newly diagnosed Veterans with hypertension.

Role of β-blockers in the cardiovascular disease continuum: a collaborative Delphi survey-based consensus from Asia-Pacific

OBJECTIVE

This Delphi method of consensus was designed to develop scientific statements for β-blockers in the continuum of cardiovascular diseases with a special focus on the role of bisoprolol.

METHODS

Eleven experienced cardiologists from across the Asia-Pacific countries participated in two rounds of the survey. In the first round, experts were asked to rate agreement/disagreement with 35 statements across seven domains regarding the use of β-blockers for treating hypertension, heart failure, coronary artery diseases, co-morbidities, as well as their safety profile, usage pattern, and pharmacokinetic variability. A consensus for a statement could be reached with >70% agreement.

RESULTS

Except for seven statements, all attained consensus in the first round. In the second round that was conducted virtually, the experts re-appraised their ratings for the seven statements along with a critical appraisal of two additional statements that were suggested by experts in the preceding round. At the end of the second round, the final version included 36 statements (34 original statements, two statements suggested by experts, and the omission of one statement that did not attain consensus). The final version of statements in the second round was disseminated among experts for their approval followed by manuscript development.

CONCLUSION

Attainment of consensus for almost all statements reconfirms the clinical benefits of β-blockers, particularly β1-selective blockers for the entire spectrum of cardiovascular diseases.

The Use of Antihypertensive Drugs as Coadjuvant Therapy in Cancer

Cancer is a complex group of diseases that constitute the second largest cause of mortality worldwide. The development of new drugs for treating this disease is a long and costly process, from the discovery of the molecule through testing in phase III clinical trials, a process during which most candidate molecules fail. The use of drugs currently employed for the management of other diseases (drug repurposing) represents an alternative for developing new medical treatments. Repurposing existing drugs is, in principle, cheaper and faster than developing new drugs. Antihypertensive drugs, primarily belonging to the pharmacological categories of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptors, direct aldosterone antagonists, β-blockers and calcium channel blockers, are commonly prescribed and have well-known safety profiles. Additionally, some of these drugs have exhibited pharmacological properties useful for the treatment of cancer, rendering them candidates for drug repurposing. In this review, we examine the preclinical and clinical evidence for utilizing antihypertensive agents in the treatment of cancer.

Nebivolol for the Treatment of Essential Systemic Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular diseases are the main cause of mortality worldwide, and systemic arterial hypertension is associated with a large number of these cases. The objective of health professionals and health policies should be searching for the best therapeutics to control this disease. A recent consensus indicated that β-blockers have recently lost their place in initial indications for the treatment of systemic arterial hypertension and are now more indicated for the treatment of hypertension in association with other clinical situations such as angina, heart failure and arrhythmia; however, it is known that this approach was based on studies that evaluated older β-blockers such as atenolol.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study was to perform a systematic review with subsequent meta-analysis on the use of nebivolol for hypertensive disease treatment, comparing it with drugs of the main antihypertensive classes.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on a search of the MEDLINE (via Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane, International Pharmaceuticals Abstracts (IPA), and Lilacs databases for randomized and double-blind clinical trials. In addition, we also searched for gray literature studies, to 31 July 2015. Next, a cumulative meta-analysis was performed, with studies being added in a sequential manner, evaluating their impact on the combined effect. For this project, we only meta-analyzed direct comparisons of random effect.

RESULTS

Overall, 981 clinical trials were included in this systematic review. After careful analysis, 34 randomized and double-blind clinical trials were included to investigate the efficacy of nebivolol on systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) control and adverse effects. The study population comprised 12,465 patients with systemic arterial hypertension (SAH) aged between 18 and 85 years; 17% of subjects were of Black ethnicity, approximately 55% were men, and almost 10% had diabetes. In SBP management, nebivolol was superior to other β-blockers and diuretics and showed no difference in efficacy when compared with angiotensin receptor blockers or calcium channel blockers. There were insufficient studies on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for adequate comparison of both SBP and DBP control. For DBP control, nebivolol was more efficient than other β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, diuretics, and calcium channel blockers.

DISCUSSION

Nebivolol is a third-generation β-blocker with additional capabilities to improve blood pressure levels in patients with arterial hypertension, because it acts by additional mechanisms such as endothelium-dependent vasodilation associated with L-arginine and oxide nitric acid, nitric oxide activity on smooth muscle cells, decreasing platelet aggregation, and leukocyte adhesion in the endothelium, decreasing oxidative stress. Although nebivolol has shown good results in controlling hypertension in this study (with few adverse events when compared with placebo treatment) and has an unquestionable benefit in individuals with heart failure (mainly with reduced ejection fraction), there is a lack of studies proving the benefit of this drug for controlling hypertension and reducing clinical outcomes such as cardiovascular (or general) mortality, acute myocardial infarction, or stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Nebivolol demonstrated at least similar control of blood pressure levels in hypertensive individuals when compared with drugs of the most used classes. In addition, in relation to the control of arterial hypertension, studies with clinical outcomes should be performed to ensure the use of this drug in detriment to others with these well-established results.

Comparison of Nebivolol and Bisoprolol for Cardiovascular Mortality in Hypertensive Patients

Introduction Beta-blockers again are now considered as first-line therapy for various cardiovascular diseases. In this study, we compare the cardiovascular event between two beta-blocker, i.e. Nebivolol and Bisoprolol. Materials and Methods It is a two-arm open-label randomized prospective study that was conducted from 1st Jan 2016 to 30th July 2019 in tertiary care hospital, Nawabshah. One thousand and fifty-six (n=1056) hypertensive patients were enrolled after informed consent, which were randomized into two equal groups. Patients were followed up for one year. Results Comparison between Nebivolol and Bisoprolol showed that all-cause mortality (9.8% vs 11.48%), cardiovascular mortality (5.4% vs 7.0%), all-cause hospitalization (14.4% vs 16.3%), and cardiovascular hospitalization (9.8% vs 12.09%) was numerically lower in nebivolol but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion Further large scale multicentric trials with a longer follow up period are needed to compare various beta-blockers for cardiovascular event.

Risk of Hospitalization for Cardiovascular Events with β-Blockers in Hypertensive Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

β-Blockers are a heterogenous class of drugs that are no longer recommended for initial antihypertension monotherapy due to unfavorable long-term cardiovascular events observed with non-vasodilatory β-blockers. However, the comparative cardiovascular event risk between the vasodilatory β1-selective antagonist/β3 agonist nebivolol and non-vasodilatory β1-blockers, atenolol and metoprolol, is unknown.

METHODS

Incident nebivolol, atenolol, or metoprolol monotherapy users with hypertension were identified using US claims data (2007-2014). The first β-blocker claim on/after 1/1/2008 defined the index drug/date. Hypertensive patients without pre-index cardiovascular history were followed until index drug discontinuation (> 90 day supply gap), use of other β-blockers, or end of continuous plan enrollment. Patients were pair-wise propensity score-matched using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, comorbid chronic pulmonary disease, rheumatic disease, renal disease, and diabetes, and use of other antihypertensive drugs during baseline. Time to first hospital claim for a cardiovascular event was assessed via Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for the variables above.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met by 81,402 patients (n = 27,134 in each matched treatment cohort), with no between-cohort differences in baseline characteristics, comorbid conditions, or average follow-up duration. Atenolol and metoprolol cohorts had greater risk of hospitalization for a composite event (myocardial infarction, angina, congestive heart failure, stroke) than nebivolol users (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval] atenolol: 1.68 [1.29, 2.17]; metoprolol: 2.05 [1.59, 2.63]; P < 0.001, both). Risks of most individual cardiovascular events were also lower with nebivolol, including myocardial infarction and angina versus atenolol, and myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and angina versus metoprolol (P < 0.05, all).

CONCLUSIONS

Nebivolol was associated with significantly lower risk of hospitalization due to composite cardiovascular events than atenolol or metoprolol in this large retrospective cohort study of monotherapy with three different β1-selective blockers in hypertensive patients.

FUNDING

Allergan plc, Madison, NJ, USA.

Gender-specific regulation of blood pressure and antihypertensive treatment

The epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, treatment effects and outcomes of the majority of cardiovascular disease differ between men and women. These differences occur due to the various expression of sex chromosome genes resulting in the different levels of sex hormones. As a result, gender-related differencesin the functioning of cardiovascular system are well-known, including vascular regulation, heart remodeling, drug metabolism, etc. Gender differences related to the cultural and social factors (behaviour, nutrition, life style, coping-strategies, relation to the disease and its prevention, etc.) also affect the course of cardiovascular diseases including hypertension. The gender–related issues of the regulation of blood pressure and therapeutic approaches to the treatment of hypertension remain the subject of high interest and debate.

Autonomic Nervous System and Stress to Predict Secondary Ischemic Events after Transient Ischemic Attack or Minor Stroke: Possible Implications of Heart Rate Variability

Transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke have high risks of recurrence and deterioration into severe ischemic strokes. Risk stratification of TIA and minor stroke is essential for early effective treatment. Traditional tools have only moderate predictive value, likely due to their inclusion of the limited number of stroke risk factors. Our review follows Hans Selye’s fundamental work on stress theory and the progressive shift of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) from adaptation to disease when stress becomes chronic. We will first show that traditional risk factors and acute triggers of ischemic stroke are chronic and acute stress factors or “stressors,” respectively. Our first review shows solid evidence of the relationship between chronic stress and stroke occurrence. The stress response is tightly regulated by the ANS whose function can be assessed with heart rate variability (HRV). Our second review demonstrates that stress-related risk factors of ischemic stroke are correlated with ANS dysfunction and impaired HRV. Our conclusions support the idea that HRV parameters may represent the combined effects of all body stressors that are risk factors for ischemic stroke and, thus, may be of important predictive value for the risk of subsequent ischemic events after TIA or minor stroke.

Effectiveness and safety of beta blockers in the management of hypertension in older adults: a systematic review to help reduce inappropriate prescribing

BACKGROUND

The benefit from a blood pressure lowering therapy with beta blockers may not outweigh its risks, especially in older populations. The aim of this study was to look for evidence on risks and benefits of beta blockers in older adults and to use this evidence to develop recommendations for the electronic decision support tool of the PRIMA-eDS project.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature using a stage approach with searches for systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, and individual studies only if the previous searches are inconclusive. The target population were older adults (≥65 years old) with hypertension. We included studies reporting on the effectiveness and/or safety of beta blockers on clinically relevant endpoints (e.g. mortality, cardiovascular events, and stroke) in the management of hypertension. The recommendations were developed according to the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, comprising one meta-analysis, four randomized controlled trials, six secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials and four observational studies. Seven studies involved only older adults and eight studies reported subgroup analyses by age. With regard to a composite endpoint (death, stroke or myocardial infarction) beta blockers were associated with a higher risk of events then were other antihypertensive agents. Further, beta blockers showed no benefit compared to other antihypertensive agents or placebo regarding mortality. They appear to be less effective than other antihypertensive agents in reducing cardiovascular events. Contradictory results were found regarding the effect of beta blockers on stroke. None of the studies explored the effect on quality of life, hospitalisation, functional impairment/status, safety endpoints or renal failure.

CONCLUSION

The quality of current evidence to interpret the benefits of beta blockers in hypertension is rather weak. It cannot be recommended to use beta blockers in older adults as first line agent for hypertension.

Biocompatible and target specific hydrophobically modified glycol chitosan nanoparticles

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. Atherosclerosis is a major cause for cardiovascular diseases. Drugs that treat atherosclerosis usually act nonspecifically. To enhance drug delivery specificity, the authors developed a hydrophobically modified glycol chitosan (HGC) nanoparticle that can specifically target activated endothelial cells. The biocompatibility of these nanoparticles toward red blood cells and platelets was evaluated through hemolysis, platelet activation, platelet thrombogenicity, and platelet aggregation assays. The biocompatibility of these nanoparticles toward vascular endothelial cells was evaluated by their effects on endothelial cell growth, metabolic activity, and activation. The results demonstrated that HGC nanoparticles did not cause hemolysis, or affect platelet activation, thrombogenicity, and aggregation capability in vitro. The nanoparticles did not impair vascular endothelial cell growth or metabolic activities in vitro, and did not cause cell activation either. When conjugated with intercellular adhesion molecular 1 antibodies, HGC nanoparticles showed a significantly increased targeting specificity toward activated endothelial cells. These results suggested that HGC nanoparticles are likely compatible toward red blood cells, platelets, and endothelial cells, and they can be potentially used to identify activated endothelial cells at atherosclerotic lesion areas within the vasculature, and deliver therapeutic drugs.

Peripheral vasoconstriction induced by β-adrenoceptor blockers: a systematic review and a network meta-analysis

AIM

Peripheral vasoconstriction has long been described as a vascular adverse effect of β-adrenoceptor blockers. Whether β-adrenoceptor blockers should be avoided in patients with peripheral vascular disease depends on pharmacological properties (e.g. preferential binding to β1 -adrenoreceptors or intrinsic sympathomimetic activity). However, this has not been confirmed in experimental studies. We performed a network meta-analysis in order to assess the comparative risk of peripheral vasoconstriction of different β-adrenoceptor blockers.

METHOD

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including β-adrenoceptor blockers that were published in core clinical journals in the Pubmed database. All RCTs reporting peripheral vasoconstriction as an adverse effect of β-adrenoceptor blockers and controls were included. Sensitivity analyses were conducted including possibly confounding covariates (latitude, properties of the β-adrenoceptor blockers, e.g. intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, vasodilation, drug indication, drug doses). The protocol and the detailed search strategy are available online (PROSPERO registry CRD42014014374).

RESULTS

Among 2238 records screened, 38 studies including 57 026 patients were selected. Overall, peripheral vasoconstriction was reported in 7% of patients with β-adrenoceptor blockers and 4.6% in the control groups (P < 0.001), with heterogeneity among drugs. Atenolol and propranolol had a significantly higher risk than placebo, whereas pindolol, acebutolol and oxprenolol had not.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that β-adrenoceptor blockers have variable propensity to enhance peripheral vasoconstriction and that it is not related to preferential binding to β1 -adrenoceptors. These findings challenge FDA and European recommendations regarding precautions and contra-indications of use of β-adrenoceptor blockers and suggest that β-adrenoceptor blockers with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity could be safely used in patients with peripheral vascular disease.

Impact of Antihypertensive Agents on Central Systolic Blood Pressure and Augmentation Index: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

New evidence suggests that central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) and augmentation index (AI) are superior predictors of adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared to peripheral systolic BP (pSBP). We performed a meta-analysis assessing the impact of antihypertensives on cSBP and AI.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched until September 2014 to identify eligible articles. A DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model was used to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). Fifty-two and 58 studies incorporating 4,381 and 3,716 unique subjects were included for cSBP and AI analysis, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, antihypertensives reduced pSBP more than cSBP (WMD 2.52 mm Hg, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.69; I (2) = 21.9%). β-Blockers (BBs) posed a significantly greater reduction in pSBP as compared to cSBP (WMD 5.19 mm Hg, 95% CI 3.21 to 7.18). α-Blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors and nicorandil reduced cSBP and pSBP in a similar manner. The overall reduction in AI from baseline was 3.09% (95% CI 2.28 to 3.90; I (2) = 84.5%). A significant reduction in AI was seen with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors, BBs, α-blockers (ABs), nicorandil, and moxonidine reduced AI nonsignificantly.

CONCLUSIONS

BBs are not as beneficial as the other antihypertensives in reducing cSBP and AI.

New Hypertension Guidelines: Progression or a Step Backwards in Hypertension?

In the last years, many hypertension guidelines have been published as new or revised versions. They follow the general trend that only clinical evidence is relevant for guidelines. Expert opinion is downplayed. At present, guidelines from three major organizations have been produced: by the European Society of Hypertension, the International Society/American Society of Hypertension, and the US Joint National Committee. We discuss eight versions of these guidelines in this review. All of these include statements on blood pressure goals or treatment algorithms for patients with high blood pressure. The variability of practical tips is great, and the recommendations, which mainly rely on evidence-based medical information, show slight differences that have resulted in some confusion with specialists and also practitioners. In the current review, the changes in the guidelines in comparison to previous guidelines are discussed, and reasons for different recommendations are explained. The hope is to reduce confusion.

Who and when should we screen for prostate cancer? Interviews with key opinion leaders

Prostate cancer screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is highly controversial. In this Q & A, Guest Editors for BMC Medicine's 'Spotlight on Prostate Cancer' article collection, Sigrid Carlsson and Andrew Vickers, invite some of the world's key opinion leaders to discuss who, and when, to screen for prostate cancer. In response to the points of view from the invited experts, the Guest Editors summarize the experts' views and give their own personal opinions on PSA screening.

Updated national and international hypertension guidelines: a review of current recommendations

Despite the availability of effective pharmacological treatments to aid the control of blood pressure, the global rate of uncontrolled blood pressure remains high. As such, further measures are required to improve blood pressure control. Recently, several national and international guidelines for the management of hypertension have been published. These aim to provide easily accessible information for healthcare professionals and patients to aid the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. In this review, we have compared new and current guidelines from the American and International Societies of Hypertension; the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology and the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention; the panel appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee; the European Societies of Hypertension and Cardiology; the French Society of Hypertension; the Canadian Hypertension Education Program; the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (UK); the Taiwan Society of Cardiology and the Chinese Hypertension League. We have identified consensus opinion regarding best practises for the management of hypertension and have highlighted any discrepancies between the recommendations. In general there is good agreement between the guidelines, however, in some areas, such as target blood pressure ranges for the elderly, further trials are required to provide sufficient high-quality evidence to form the basis of recommendations.

Beta-Blockers in the Management of Hypertension and/or Chronic Kidney Disease

This minireview provides current summaries of beta-blocker use in the management of hypertension and/or chronic kidney disease. Accumulated evidence suggests that atenolol is not sufficiently effective as a primary tool to treat hypertension. The less-than-adequate effect of beta-blockers in lowering the blood pressure and on vascular protection, and the unfavorable effects of these drugs, as compared to other antihypertensive agents, on the metabolic profile have been pointed out. On the other hand, in patients with chronic kidney disease, renin-angiotensin system blockers are the drugs of first choice for achieving the goal of renal protection. Recent studies have reported that vasodilatory beta-blockers have adequate antihypertensive efficacy and less harmful effects on the metabolic profile, and also exert beneficial effects on endothelial function and renal protection. However, there is still not sufficient evidence on the beneficial effects of the new beta-blockers.

Predictors of the incidence of all-cause mortality and deaths due to diabetes and renal diseases among patients newly prescribed antihypertensive agents: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials have shown that the major antihypertensive drug classes are similarly effective to reduce mortality, but whether these drug class difference exists in clinical practice has been scarcely explored. This study evaluated the association between antihypertensive drug class, all-cause mortality and deaths due to diabetes or renal disease in real-life clinical settings.

METHODS

A clinical database in Hong Kong included all patients who were prescribed their first-ever antihypertensive agents between 2001 and 2005 from the public healthcare sector. All patients were followed up for five years, and grouped according to the initial antihypertensive prescription. The associations between antihypertensive drug class, all-cause mortality or combined diabetes and renal mortality, respectively, were evaluated by Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

From 218,047 eligible patients, 33,288 (15.3%) died within five years after their first-ever antihypertensive prescription and among which 1055 patients (0.48%) died of diabetes or renal disease. After adjusted for age, gender, socioeconomic status, service settings, district of residence, medication adherence, and the number of comorbidities, each drug class was similarly likely to be associated with mortality due to diabetes or renal disease [Adjusted Hazard Ratios (AHR) ranged from 0.92 to 1.73, p=0.287-0.939] and all-cause mortality (AHR ranged from 0.83 to 1.02) except for beta-blockers (AHR=0.815, 95% C.I. 0.68-0.87, p=0.024) when ACEI was used as a reference group in propensity score-adjusted analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide real-life evidence reinforcing that any major antihypertensive drug class is suitable as a first-line agent for management of hypertension as recommended by international guidelines.

Characteristics, drug combinations and dosages of primary care patients with uncontrolled ambulatory blood pressure and high medication adherence

Most studies on the prevalence and determinants of resistant hypertension (RH) do not account for white coat hypertension, medication non-adherence, or use of suboptimal treatment dosages. We studied the characteristics, drug combinations, and dosages of patients on at least three antihypertensives of different classes who had uncontrolled blood pressure on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and high medication adherence measured by electronic monitoring. The data were collected as part of the baseline measures of a hypertension control trial. Of 140 monitored primary care patients, all with uncontrolled office blood pressure, 69 (49%) were on at least three antihypertensives of different classes. Of these 69, 15 (22%) were controlled on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, 20 (29%) were uncontrolled and non-adherent, leaving only 34 (49%) adherent to their medications and having uncontrolled ambulatory hypertension (uncontrolled RH). Thirty-one (91%) of the 34 uncontrolled RH patients were prescribed a diuretic, of which 24 were on hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg. Less than half of the patients on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, or calcium channel blocker were prescribed maximal doses of these agents. Half of the RH can be attributed to white coat effect and poor medication adherence, and all of the remaining patients were on apparently suboptimal drug combinations and/or dosages. Primary care physicians need to be educated regarding the optimal treatment of RH.

Control of hypertension in the critically ill: a pathophysiological approach

Severe acute arterial hypertension can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. After excluding a reversible etiology, choice of therapeutic intervention should be based on evaluation of a number of factors, such as age, comorbidities, and other ongoing therapies. A rational pathophysiological approach should then be applied that integrates the effects of the drug on blood volume, vascular tone, and other determinants of cardiac output. Vasodilators, calcium channel blockers, and beta-blocking agents can all decrease arterial pressure but by totally different modes of action, which may be appropriate or contraindicated in individual patients. There is no preferred agent for all situations, although some drugs may have a more attractive profile than others, with rapid onset action, short half-life, and fewer adverse reactions. In this review, we focus on the main mechanisms underlying severe hypertension in the critically ill and how using a pathophysiological approach can help the intensivist decide on treatment options.

Evidence for non-communicable diseases: analysis of Cochrane reviews and randomised trials by World Bank classification

INTRODUCTION

Prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is increasing globally, with the greatest projected increases in low-income and middle-income countries. We sought to quantify the proportion of Cochrane evidence relating to NCDs derived from such countries.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane database of systematic reviews for reviews relating to NCDs highlighted in the WHO NCD action plan (cardiovascular, cancers, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases). We excluded reviews at the protocol stage and those that were repeated or had been withdrawn. For each review, two independent researchers extracted data relating to the country of the corresponding author and the number of trials and participants from countries, using the World Bank classification of gross national income per capita.

RESULTS

797 reviews were analysed, with a reported total number of 12 340 trials and 10 937 306 participants. Of the corresponding authors 90% were from high-income countries (41% from the UK). Of the 746 reviews in which at least one trial had met the inclusion criteria, only 55% provided a summary of the country of included trials. Analysis of the 633 reviews in which country of trials could be established revealed that almost 90% of trials and over 80% of participants were from high-income countries. 438 (5%) trials including 1 145 013 (11.7%) participants were undertaken in low-middle income countries. We found that only 13 (0.15%) trials with 982 (0.01%) participants were undertaken in low-income countries. Other than the five Cochrane NCD corresponding authors from South Africa, only one other corresponding author was from Africa (Gambia).

DISCUSSION

The overwhelming body of evidence for NCDs pertains to high-income countries, with only a small number of review authors based in low-income settings. As a consequence, there is an urgent need for research infrastructure and funding for the undertaking of high-quality trials in this area.

[Non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment of arterial hypertension: current situation]

A permanent and successful treatment of high blood pressure is based on a combination of non-pharmacological treatment measures and pharmacological therapy. The most proven non-pharmacological measures are physical and sports activities, weight reduction, dietary adaption and reduction of salt intake as well as nicotine abstinence and moderate alcohol consumption. A blood pressure reducing effect of evidence grade A was demonstrated for these 4 pillars of non-pharmacological therapy in studies. For pharmacological treatment five main substance groups are available: thiazide diuretics, ACE inhibitors, AT1 blockers, calcium channel blockers and beta blockers. A very good blood pressure reducing effect with an advantageous side effect profile has been proven for all substances. The initial high blood pressure therapy can be carried out with monotherapy but therapy with several antihypertensives is often necessary for the very varied combination of compounds which are available in a meaningful combination and dosage of effective ingredients. For the treatment of comorbid hypertensive patients recommendations are available for an individualized pharmacological treatment corresponding to the specific cardiovascular risk and comorbidity. High blood pressure therapy must be continuously carried out over many years. For permanent success of the therapy good compliance is indispensible which can be encouraged by integration in the therapy and should be regularly controlled.