Individualizing antihypertensive combination therapies: clinical and hemodynamic considerations

Pharmacotherapy Decision Aids for the American Heart Association 2021 Statement on Management of Stage 1 Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This is a pragmatic decision aid for initiating pharmacotherapy for stage 1 hypertension.

RECENT FINDINGS

If a stage 1 patient presents with clinical signs of fluid retention, then a diuretic should be the primary agent. However, if the patient is normovolemic, then a vasodilator should be the primary agent. If targeted blood pressure is not achieved with the primary agent, then the choices are dose escalation or the addition of a second drug. For stage 1, the addition of secondary agents is preferred. This approach includes the polypill (a single pill with multiple low-dose antihypertensive agents). The positives are the polypill lessens the need to make decisions associated with up-titration and the low doses mitigate adverse side effects. The polypill targets several concurrent mechanisms to counteract hypertension. For stage 1, the goal should be to lower blood pressure with a simple regiment which minimizes adverse side affects.

Understanding the Haemodynamics of Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article introduces the haemodynamic principles that underpin the pathophysiology of hypertension and introduces a rational physiological approach to appropriate pharmacologic treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Outdated understanding of haemodynamics based on previous measurement systems can no longer be applied to our understanding of the circulation. We question the current view of hypertension as defined by a predominantly systolic blood pressure and introduce the concept of vasogenic, cardiogenic and mixed-origin hypertension. We postulate that failure to identify the individual's haemodynamic pattern may lead to the use of inappropriate medication, which in turn may be a major factor in patient non-compliance with therapeutic strategies. A population-based approach to treatment of hypertension may lead to suboptimal functional dynamics in the individual patient. Finally, we question the validity of current guidelines and published evidence relating morbidity and mortality to the future treatment of hypertension. The importance of individual haemodynamic profiles may be pivotal in the understanding, diagnosis and treatment of hypertension if optimal control with minimal adverse effects is to be achieved. Research based on individual haemodynamic patterns is overdue.

The diagnostic value of supine blood pressure in hypertension

INTRODUCTION

Correct blood pressure (BP) measurement is crucial in the diagnosis of arterial hypertension (AH), and controversy exists whether supine BP should be treated as equal to sitting BP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of supine BP to sitting BP and ambulatory BP with regard to identification of diagnostic cut-offs for hypertension.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study included 280 patients with AH (mean age: 44.3 ±10.6 years). The following measurements of BP were performed and analyzed: 1) sitting office blood pressure measurement (OSBP and ODBP); 2) supine BP (supSBP and supDBP), measured automatically (5 times with a 2-minute interval) during evaluation by the Niccomo device (Medis, Germany); 3) 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring.

RESULTS

The mean supSBP and supDBP were found to be lower than OSBP and ODBP (130.9 ±14.2 vs. 136.6 ±15.5 mm Hg and 84.8 ±9.4 vs. 87.8 ±10.2 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.000001). The correlations between ABP and supBP/OBP were moderate and strong (correlation coefficients in range 0.55-0.76). The ROC analysis revealed that mean supBP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg was more precise than OBP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg in diagnosing hypertension (AUC: 0.820 vs. 0.550; sensitivity 80.7% vs. 57.4%; specificity 83.2% vs. 52.7%; p < 0.0001) and the additive value derived mostly from its higher predictive power of identifying patients with increased night-time BP.

CONCLUSIONS

In young and middle-aged hypertensive patients the blood pressure during a 10-minute supine rest was lower than in the sitting position. The supine blood pressure ≥ 130/80 mm Hg was found to be a specific and sensitive threshold for hypertension.

Who benefits more from hemodynamically guided hypotensive therapy? The experience from two randomized, prospective and controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Arterial hypertension (AH) may be related to fluid retention, increased vascular resistance or hyperdynamic heart function. Impedance cardiography (ICG) is shown to be useful in the individualization of antihypertensive therapy but little is known about who most benefits from this therapeutic approach. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the effectiveness of ICG-guided antihypertensive therapy with respect to baseline blood pressure (BP) from the perspective of 12 weeks' observation in randomized, prospective and controlled trials.

METHODS

This analysis involved 272 patients (average age: 44.1 ± 10.8 years) with AH. After baseline evaluation, including: office BP measurement (systolic, SBP; diastolic, DBP; mean, MBP) and ambulatory BP monitoring (mean 24-h SBP, mean 24-h DBP) the subjects were randomly assigned to groups of empiric [GE] and ICG-guided antihypertensive therapy [HD]. The results were evaluated separately in subgroups derived from median of MBP (110 mmHg): with slightly increased ('SI_BP') and more increased BP ('MI_BP'). The comparative analysis included absolute change in BP (d_OSBP, d_ODBP, d_24-h SBP, d_24-h DBP) and the percentage of patients with reduction of BP ⩾ 10 mmHg (d10_OSBP, d10_ODBP, d10_24-h SBP, d10_24-h DBP).

RESULTS

ICG-guided therapy was shown to be superior to the empiric approach, especially in MI_BP. In this subgroup, the BP reduction in HD was higher than in GE: d_OSBP (23.3 ± 10.8 versus 18.5 ± 13.9 mmHg; p = 0.035), d_ODBP (16.0 ± 6.3 versus 11.6 ± 9.6 mmHg; p = 0.003), d_24-h SBP (17.7 ± 10.8 versus 13.1 ± 13.1 mmHg; p = 0.035). This benefit was also confirmed by a higher percentage of patients with significant BP reduction: d10_OSBP (87.7% versus 69.1%; p = 0.012), d10_ODBP (69.2% versus 47.3%; p = 0.012) and d10_24-h SBP (72.3% versus 52.7%; p = 0.012). The comparison in the SI_BP subgroup did not reveal such significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The hemodynamically guided pharmacotherapy results in greater BP reduction. This effect is more pronounced in patients with higher baseline BP, while in those with slightly increased BP the empiric approach seems comparable to ICG.

Global longitudinal two-dimensional systolic strain is associated with hemodynamic alterations in arterial hypertension

Arterial hypertension can lead to the progressive deterioration of the left ventricular (LV) performance. The aim of this study was to estimate the relation of global longitudinal systolic strain (GLSS) with central and systemic hemodynamics assessed by applanation tonometry and impedance cardiography in 125 hypertensive patients. Those with more impaired GLSS characterized with 1/worse diastolic function (mitral inflow early phase (E) to mitral septal annulus early diastolic velocity (e') ratio, 8.0 vs. 7.0, P = .014); 2/lower LV performance (cardiac index, 3.14 vs. 3.64 l/min/m(2); P = .007), and 3/higher afterload (systemic vascular resistance index, 2506 vs. 2107 dyn s m(2)/cm(5); P = .008). No relevant differences in, that is, gender, age, blood pressure, LV mass index, left chambers dimensions, and central blood pressure characteristics were identified. The results revealed that impaired GLSS is related to LV diastolic dysfunction and altered hemodynamics which may be markers of early systolic LV dysfunction related to arterial hypertension.