Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension)

The Polypill: A New Alternative in the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the primary cause of death and disability worldwide. Although age-standardized CVD mortality rates decreased globally by 14.5% between 2006 and 2016, the burden of CVD remains disproportionately higher in low- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries. Even though proven, effective approaches based on multiple-drug intake aimed at the prevention and treatment of CVD are currently available, poor adherence, early discontinuation of treatment, and suboptimal daily execution of the prescribed therapeutic regimes give rise to shortfalls in drug exposure, leading to high variability in the responses to the prescribed medications. Wald and Law, in their landmark paper published in BMJ 2003, hypothesized that the use of a fixed-dose combination of statins, β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and aspirin (classic Polypill composition) may increase adherence and decrease CVD by up to 80% when prescribed as primary prevention or in substitution of traditional protocols. Since then, many clinical trials have tested this hypothesis, with comparable results. This review aims to describe the available clinical trials performed to assess the impact of fixed-dose combinations on adherence, cost-effectiveness, and the risk factors critical to the onset of CVD.

Association of hypertension and depression with mortality: an exploratory study with interaction and mediation models

BACKGROUND

The association of hypertension and depression with mortality has not been fully understood. We aimed to explore the possible independent or joint association of hypertension and depression with mortality. Their interaction effects on mortality and possible mediating role were also investigated.

METHODS

Associations of hypertension, depression, and their interaction with all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality were evaluated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models. The mediation analysis was conducted with a Sobel test.

RESULTS

A total of 35152 participants were included in the final analysis. Hypertension and depression were independently associated with increased risk of all-cause and CVD mortality. The co-existence of hypertension and depression resulted in a 1.7-fold [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3-2.1] increase in all-cause mortality and a 2.3-fold (95% CI: 1.4-3.7) increase in CVD mortality compared to those with neither of them. Hypertension and depression showed no significant multiplicative (P for interaction, 0.587) and additive interaction (P for relative excess risk of interaction, 0.243; P for Interaction on additive scale, 0.654) on all-cause mortality, as well as on CVD mortality. Depression did not mediate the relationship between hypertension and all-cause (Z=1.704, P=0.088) and CVD mortality (Z=1.547, P=0.122). Hypertension did not mediate the relationship between all-cause and CVD mortality as well.

CONCLUSION

Hypertension and depression were related to all-cause and CVD mortality independently and the co-existence of them increased the risk of mortality. However, there is no interaction effect of them on mortality, and hypertension or depression did not mediate the association of each other with mortality.

Prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension and contributing factors in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Uncontrolled hypertension (HTN) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. The prevalence of HTN in the Ethiopian adult population is almost 20%.This study aimed to determine the prevalence of uncontrolled HTN and its contributing factors among patients with HTN in Ethiopia undergoing treatment.

Methods

Electronic bibliographic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, Hinari (Research4Life), Embase, and Scopus were searched for original records in the English language that assessed HTN control in Ethiopia and were available before 29 June 2023. The data were extracted using a format prepared in Microsoft Excel and exported to the software STATA 17.0 for analysis. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO with the reference number CRD42023440121.

Results

A total of 26 studies with 9,046 patients with HTN were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, of which 11 studies were used to assess factors contributing to uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) in patients in Ethiopia. The estimated prevalence of uncontrolled HTN in the population of Ethiopia is 51% [95% confidence interval (CI), 42%-60%]. The subgroup analysis, based on the assessment tools, region, and follow-up period, revealed that the prevalence of uncontrolled BP was highest following the guidelines of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) (89%; 95% CI: 87%-91%) and in Addis Ababa (58%; 95% CI: 40%-76%), and the lowest proportion of uncontrolled BP was in the 3-month follow-up period (34%; 95% CI: 29%-39%). The presence of diabetes mellitus showed the highest impact (pooled odds ratio: 5.19; CI: 1.41-19.11) for uncontrolled HTN. The univariate meta-regression method confirmed that the sample size, year of publication, and subgroups were not sources of heterogeneity in the pooled estimates. Egger's regression test did not indicate the presence of publication bias.

Conclusion

More than half of the hypertensive patients in Ethiopia have uncontrolled BP. Diabetes mellitus, advanced age, male sex, and the presence of comorbidities are among the factors contributing to uncontrolled HTN in Ethiopia. The concerned bodies working in this area should implement interventional strategies and recommendations that might be helpful in achieving optimal BP in hypertensive patients.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023440121, PROSPERO (CRD42023440121).

Antihypertensive treatment in people of very old age with frailty: time for a paradigm shift?

The optimal management of hypertension in individuals aged 80 years or older with frailty remains uncertain due to multiple gaps in evidence. Complex health issues, polypharmacy, and limited physiological reserve make responding to antihypertensive treatments unpredictable. Patients in this age group may have limited life expectancy, so their quality of life should be prioritized when making treatment decisions. Further research is needed to identify which patients would benefit from more relaxed blood pressure targets and which antihypertensive medications are preferable or should be avoided. A paradigm shift is required in attitudes towards treatment, placing equal emphasis on deprescribing and prescribing when optimizing care. This review discusses the current evidence on managing hypertension in individuals aged 80 years or older with frailty, but further research is essential to address the gaps in knowledge and improve the care of this population.

Korean Society of Heart Failure Guidelines for the Management of Heart Failure: Management of the Underlying Etiologies and Comorbidities of Heart Failure

Most patients with heart failure (HF) have multiple comorbidities, which impact their quality of life, aggravate HF, and increase mortality. Cardiovascular comorbidities include systemic and pulmonary hypertension, ischemic and valvular heart diseases, and atrial fibrillation. Non-cardiovascular comorbidities include diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic kidney and pulmonary diseases, iron deficiency and anemia, and sleep apnea. In patients with HF with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors combined with calcium channel blockers and/or diuretics is an effective treatment regimen. Measurement of pulmonary vascular resistance via right heart catheterization is recommended for patients with HF considered suitable for implantation of mechanical circulatory support devices or as heart transplantation candidates. Coronary angiography remains the gold standard for the diagnosis and reperfusion in patients with HF and angina pectoris refractory to antianginal medications. In patients with HF and atrial fibrillation, long-term anticoagulants are recommended according to the CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Valvular heart diseases should be treated medically and/or surgically. In patients with HF and DM, metformin is relatively safer; thiazolidinediones cause fluid retention and should be avoided in patients with HF and dyspnea. In renal insufficiency, both volume status and cardiac performance are important for therapy guidance. In patients with HF and pulmonary disease, beta-blockers are underused, which may be related to increased mortality. In patients with HF and anemia, iron supplementation can help improve symptoms. In obstructive sleep apnea, continuous positive airway pressure therapy helps avoid severe nocturnal hypoxia. Appropriate management of comorbidities is important for improving clinical outcomes in patients with HF.

Korean Society of Heart Failure Guidelines for the Management of Heart Failure: Management of the Underlying Etiologies and Comorbidities of Heart Failure

Most patients with heart failure (HF) have multiple comorbidities, which impact their quality of life, aggravate HF, and increase mortality. Cardiovascular comorbidities include systemic and pulmonary hypertension, ischemic and valvular heart diseases, and atrial fibrillation. Non-cardiovascular comorbidities include diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic kidney and pulmonary diseases, iron deficiency and anemia, and sleep apnea. In patients with HF with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors combined with calcium channel blockers and/or diuretics is an effective treatment regimen. Measurement of pulmonary vascular resistance via right heart catheterization is recommended for patients with HF considered suitable for implantation of mechanical circulatory support devices or as heart transplantation candidates. Coronary angiography remains the gold standard for the diagnosis and reperfusion in patients with HF and angina pectoris refractory to antianginal medications. In patients with HF and atrial fibrillation, long-term anticoagulants are recommended according to the CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Valvular heart diseases should be treated medically and/or surgically. In patients with HF and DM, metformin is relatively safer; thiazolidinediones cause fluid retention and should be avoided in patients with HF and dyspnea. In renal insufficiency, both volume status and cardiac performance are important for therapy guidance. In patients with HF and pulmonary disease, beta-blockers are underused, which may be related to increased mortality. In patients with HF and anemia, iron supplementation can help improve symptoms. In obstructive sleep apnea, continuous positive airway pressure therapy helps avoid severe nocturnal hypoxia. Appropriate management of comorbidities is important for improving clinical outcomes in patients with HF.

Monitoring risk and preventing ischemic stroke in the very old

INTRODUCTION

Stroke is a significant cause of death, and the leading cause of severe long-term disability for individuals over 80 (the very old), yet few studies of such risk factors for ischemic stroke, or the known mitigation techniques, in this population, and the evidence base regarding risk modification strategies in this susceptible population can be inconsistent and incomplete. This article examines current guidelines and evidence regarding medical management, lifestyle changes, and psychosocial interactions that can contribute to the primary and secondary prevention of ischemic stroke in the very old.

AREAS COVERED

The authors conducted a literature search for ischemic stroke prevention and risk assessment in the elderly via PubMed. Furthermore, they describe current strategies for monitoring risk and preventing ischemic stroke in the elderly population.

EXPERT OPINION

Ischemic stroke poses a significant health risk to the elderly, with prevention relying on managing modifiable risk factors such as hypertension, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, and high cholesterol, as well as promoting healthy lifestyle choices like quitting smoking, regular physical activity and a heart-healthy diet. Healthcare providers must adopt a multifaceted approach, addressing individual and population-level factors while remaining vigilant in monitoring and managing risk factors to reduce the incidence and impact of stroke in older adults.

Hypertension management in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities

Arterial hypertension is a leading cause of death globally. Due to ageing, the rising incidence of obesity, and socioeconomic and environmental changes, its incidence increases worldwide. Hypertension commonly coexists with Type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidaemia, sedentary lifestyle, and smoking leading to risk amplification. Blood pressure lowering by lifestyle modifications and antihypertensive drugs reduce cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. Guidelines recommend dual- and triple-combination therapies using renin–angiotensin system blockers, calcium channel blockers, and/or a diuretic. Comorbidities often complicate management. New drugs such as angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve CV and renal outcomes. Catheter-based renal denervation could offer an alternative treatment option in comorbid hypertension associated with increased sympathetic nerve activity. This review summarises the latest clinical evidence for managing hypertension with CV comorbidities.

Benefits and risks of antihypertensive medication in adults with different systolic blood pressure: A meta-analysis from the perspective of the number needed to treat

Background

The blood pressure (BP) threshold for initial pharmacological treatment remains controversial. The number needed to treat (NNT) is a significant indicator. This study aimed to explore the benefits and risks of antihypertensive medications in participants with different systolic BPs (SBPs), and cardiovascular disease status from the perspective of the NNT.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis of 52 randomized placebo-controlled trials. The data were extracted from published articles and pooled to calculate NNTs. The participants were divided into five groups, based on the mean SBP at entry (120–129.9, 130–139.9, 140–159.9, 160–179.9, and ≥180 mmHg). Furthermore, we stratified patients into those with and without cardiovascular disease. The primary outcomes were the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation.

Results

Antihypertensive medications were not associated with MACEs, however, it increased AEs, when the SBP was <140 mmHg. For participants with cardiovascular disease or at a high risk of heart failure and stroke, antihypertensive treatment reduced MACEs when SBP was ≥130 mmHg. Despite this, only 2–4 subjects had reduced MACEs per 100 patients receiving antihypertensive medications for 3.50 years. The number of individuals who needed to treat to avoid MACEs declined with an increased cardiovascular risk.

Conclusion

Pharmacological treatment could be activated when SBP reaches 140 mmHg. For people with cardiovascular disease or at a higher risk of stroke and heart failure, 130 mmHg may be a better therapeutic threshold. It could be more cost-effective to prioritize antihypertensive medications for people with a high risk of developing cardiovascular disease.

RSSDI Guidelines for the management of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus

Hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) are two of the leading lifestyle diseases in the Indian and South Asian populations that often co-exist due to overlapping pathophysiological factors. Obesity, insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress are thought to be some common pathways. Up to 50% of hypertensive cases in India are diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), which defines the need for a comprehensive guideline for managing hypertension in diabetic patients. These RSSDI guidelines have been formulated based on consultation with expert endocrinologists in India and Southeast Asia, acknowledging the needs of the Indian population. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and office and home-based blood pressure (BP) monitoring are recommended for the early analysis of risks. Cardiovascular risks, end-organ damage, and renal disorders are the primary complications associated with diabetic hypertension that needs to be managed with the help of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. The non-pharmacological interventions include the nutrition education of the patient to reduce the intake of salt, sodium, and trans fats and increase the consumption of nuts, fresh fruits, vegetables, and potassium-rich foods. It is also recommended to initiate 50 to 60 min of exercise three to four times a week since physical activity has shown to be more beneficial for hypertension control in Indian patients than dietary modulation. For the pharmacological management of hypertension in patients with T2DM, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are recommended as the first line of therapy, demonstrating their superiority over other antihypertensive agents such as ACEi. However, most of the global hypertension guidelines recommend initiation with combination therapy to achieve better BP control in most patients and to reduce the risk of adverse events. For combination therapy, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are recommended to be administered along with ARBs instead of beta-blockers or diuretics to avoid the risk of cardiovascular events and hyperglycaemia. Among the CCBs, novel molecules (e.g. cilnidipine) are recommended in combination with ARBs for better cardiovascular and reno-protection in diabetic hypertensive patients.

Effects of elevated systolic blood pressure on ischemic heart disease: a Burden of Proof study

High systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a major risk factor for ischemic heart disease (IHD), the leading cause of death worldwide. Using data from published observational studies and controlled trials, we estimated the mean SBP-IHD dose-response function and burden of proof risk function (BPRF), and we calculated a risk outcome score (ROS) and corresponding star rating (one to five). We found a very strong, significant harmful effect of SBP on IHD, with a mean risk-relative to that at 100 mm Hg SBP-of 1.39 (95% uncertainty interval including between-study heterogeneity 1.34-1.44) at 120 mm Hg, 1.81 (1.70-1.93) at 130 mm Hg and 4.48 (3.81-5.26) at 165 mm Hg. The conservative BPRF measure indicated that SBP exposure between 107.5 and 165.0 mm Hg raised risk by 101.36% on average, yielding a ROS of 0.70 and star rating of five. Our analysis shows that IHD risk was already increasing at 120 mm Hg SBP, rising steadily up to 165 mm Hg and increasing less steeply above that point. Our study endorses the need to prioritize and strengthen strategies for screening, to raise awareness of the need for timely diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and to increase the resources allocated for understanding primordial prevention of elevated blood pressure.

Optimal blood pressure target in the elderly: rationale and design of the HOW to Optimize eLDerly systolic Blood Pressure (HOWOLD-BP) trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The optimal systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal for elderly patients with hypertension, especially to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence and improve outcome, is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the beneficial effects of intensive treatment for hypertension on the incidence of CVD in elderly Korean patients.

METHODS

The HOW to Optimize eLDerly systolic Blood Pressure (HOWOLD-BP) trial is a multicenter, parallel-design, open-label, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate whether intensive treatment (SBP ≤ 130 mmHg) will provide more benefits in lowering the incidence and mortality associated with CVD than standard treatment (SBP ≤ 140 mmHg) in elderly patients with hypertension aged ≥ 65 years. For this study, eleven university hospitals in Korea will enroll approximately 3,176 elderly patients with hypertension between 2019 and 2022. Patients will be requested to visit the clinic every 4 months for the first year and every 6 months thereafter for 36 months. Parameters, including clinic and home blood pressure, anthropometric and laboratory findings, and frailty assessments, will be collected according to the standardized protocol. The primary outcome is a composite of CVD (acute coronary syndrome, stroke, and heart failure) incidence and cardiovascular deaths.

RESULTS

As of December 2021, 1,655 participants had been enrolled in the study, including 831 patients in the standard group and 824 patients in the intensive group.

CONCLUSION

The HOWOLD-BP trial is the first study performed in Korea to evaluate the beneficial effects of intensive blood pressure treatment on CVD in elderly patients with hypertension. The results of this study will help clarify the appropriate target SBP for this population.

Current and Emerging Classes of Pharmacological Agents for the Management of Hypertension

Cardiovascular disease accounts for more than 17 million deaths globally every year, of which complications of hypertension account for 9.4 million deaths worldwide. Early detection and management of hypertension can prevent costly interventions, including dialysis and cardiac surgery. Non-pharmacological approaches for managing hypertension commonly involve lifestyle modification, including exercise and dietary regulations such as reducing salt and fluid intake; however, a majority of patients will eventually require antihypertensive medications. In 2020, the International Society of Hypertension published worldwide guidelines in its efforts to reduce the global prevalence of raised blood pressure (BP) in adults aged 18 years or over. Currently, several classes of medications are used to control hypertension, either as mono- or combination therapy depending on the disease severity. These drug classes include those that target the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) and adrenergic receptors, calcium channel blockers, diuretics and vasodilators. While some of these classes of medications have shown significant benefits in controlling BP and reducing cardiovascular mortality, the prevalence of hypertension remains high. Significant efforts have been made in developing new classes of drugs that lower BP; these medications exert their therapeutic benefits through different pathways and mechanism of actions. With several of these emerging classes in phase III clinical trials, it is hoped that the discovery of these novel therapeutic avenues will aid in reducing the global burden of hypertension.

Management of hypertension in patients with diabetic kidney disease: Summary of the Joint Association of British Clinical Diabetologists and UK Kidney Association (ABCD-UKKA) Guideline 2021

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) accounts for >40% cases of chronic kidney disease (CKD) globally. Hypertension is a major risk factor for progression of DKD and the high incidence of cardiovascular disease and mortality in these people. Meticulous management of hypertension is therefore crucial to slow down the progression of DKD and reduce cardiovascular risk. Randomized controlled trial evidence differs in type 1 and type 2 diabetes and in different stages of DKD in terms of target blood pressure (BP). Renin-angiotensin blocking agents reduce progression of DKD and cardiovascular events in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, albeit differently according to the stage of CKD. There is emerging evidence for the benefit of sodium glucose cotransporter 2, nonsteroidal selective mineralocorticoid antagonists, and endothelin-A receptor antagonists in slowing progression and reducing cardiovascular events in DKD. This UK guideline, developed jointly by diabetologists and nephrologists, has reviewed all available current evidence regarding the management of hypertension in DKD to produce a set of comprehensive individualized recommendations for BP control and the use of antihypertensive agents according to age, type of diabetes, and stage of CKD (https://ukkidney.org/sites/renal.org/files/Management-of-hypertension-and-RAAS-blockade-in-adults-with-DKD.pdf). A succinct summary of the guideline, including an infographic, is presented here.

Is Blood Pressure Lowering in the Very Elderly With Previous Stroke Associated With a Higher Risk of Adverse Events?

Background We investigated whether blood pressure lowering for secondary prevention is associated with a reduction in recurrent stroke risk and/or a higher risk of adverse events in very elderly compared with younger trial participants. Methods and Results This is a random effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of blood pressure lowering for secondary stroke prevention to evaluate age-stratified (<80, ≥80 years) risk of adverse events. Ovid-MEDLINE was searched for trials between 1970 and 2020. Summary-level data were acquired including outcomes of stroke, cardiovascular events, mortality, and adverse events. Seven trials were included comprising 38 596 participants, of whom 2336 (6.1%) were aged ≥80 years. There was an overall reduction in stroke risk in the intervention group compared with controls (risk ratio [RR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.80, 0.98], I²=49%), and the magnitude of risk reduction did not differ by age subgroup (<80, ≥80 years). There was no increase in the risk of hypotensive symptoms in the intervention group for patients aged <80 years (RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.99], 1.44, I²=0%), but there was an increased risk in those ≥80 years (RR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.22], 3.86, I²=0%). No increase was observed in the risk of falls, syncope, study withdrawal, or falls in either age subgroup. Conclusions Very elderly people in secondary prevention trials of blood pressure lowering have an increased risk of hypotensive symptoms, but with no statistical increase in the risk of falls, syncope, or mortality. However, evidence is lacking for frail elderly with multiple comorbidities who may be more vulnerable to adverse effects of blood pressure lowering.

Assessment of Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction as a Surrogate for All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality in Treatment or Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE

Although nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with an increased risk of mortality, evidence validating nonfatal MI as a surrogate end point for all-cause or cardiovascular (CV) mortality is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether nonfatal MI may be a surrogate for all-cause or CV mortality in patients with or at risk for coronary artery disease.

DATA SOURCES

In this meta-analysis, PubMed was searched from inception until December 31, 2020, for randomized clinical trials of interventions to treat or prevent coronary artery disease reporting mortality and nonfatal MI published in 3 leading journals.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials including at least 1000 patients with 24 months of follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Trial-level correlations between nonfatal MI and all-cause or CV mortality were assessed for surrogacy using the coefficient of determination (R2). The criterion for surrogacy was set at 0.8. Subgroup analyses based on study subject (primary prevention, secondary prevention, mixed primary and secondary prevention, and revascularization), era of trial (before 2000, 2000-2009, and 2010 and after), and follow-up duration (2.0-3.9, 4.0-5.9, and ≥6.0 years) were performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause or CV mortality and nonfatal MI.

RESULTS

A total of 144 articles randomizing 1 211 897 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Nonfatal MI did not meet the threshold for surrogacy for all-cause (R2 = 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08) or CV (R2 = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.27) mortality. Nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality in primary (R2 = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001-0.26), secondary (R2 = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.00-0.20), mixed primary and secondary prevention (R2 = 0.001; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08), or revascularization trials (R2 = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.002-0.50). For trials enrolling patients before 2000 (R2 = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.36), between 2000 and 2009 (R2 = 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.17), and from 2010 and after (R2 = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00-0.09), nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality. Nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality in randomized clinical trials with 2.0 to 3.9 (R2 = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08), 4.0 to 5.9 (R2 = 0.06; 95% CI, 0.001-0.16), or 6.0 or more years of follow-up (R2 = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.01-0.55).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this meta-analysis do not appear to establish nonfatal MI as a surrogate for all-cause or CV mortality in randomized clinical trials of interventions to treat or prevent coronary artery disease.

Guide de Pratique Clinique. Prise en charge de l’hypertension artérielle chez l’adulte en Tunisie

Ce document a été réalisé dans le cadre d'une collaboration entre l'Instance Nationale de l’Évaluation et de l'Accréditation en Santé (INEAS), la Société Tunisienne de Cardiologie et de Chirurgie Cardiovasculaire (STCCCV) et la Caisse Nationale d’Assurance Maladie (CNAM).

Lipid Monitoring After Initiation of Lipid-Lowering Therapies: Return of Performance Measures?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The 2015 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Focused Update of Secondary Prevention Lipid Performance Measures removed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) assessment as a performance measure. This review discusses the evidence supporting the importance of lipid monitoring in the secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

RECENT FINDINGS

The 2018 AHA/ACC Multisociety cholesterol guideline (as did the 2013 guideline) recommends a lipid panel after initiating lipid-lowering therapy to monitor adherence and medication efficacy. The 2018 guideline also recommends adding nonstatin therapy in very-high-risk ASCVD patients with LDL-C ≥70 mg/dL despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. The removal of LDL-C monitoring as a performance measure is not consistent with the 2018 cholesterol guidelines. Given the importance of monitoring lipid-lowering medication efficacy and adherence and optimally reducing LDL-C in very-high-risk patients with additional evidence-based nonstatin therapy, LDL-C assessment after initiating lipid-lowering therapy should be reinstated as a performance measure for patients with ASCVD.

Impact of stroke work on the ability of left ventricular mass to account for pressure effects on function in a community with prevalent systemic flow-dependent hypertension

AIMS

To determine whether the confounding influence of stroke work on left ventricular mass (LVM) limits the ability of LVM to detect hypertensive LV dysfunction in systemic flow-dependent hypertension.

METHODS

In a community with prevalent systemic flow-dependent hypertension (n = 709), arterial haemodynamics, LVM and LV function were determined using central arterial pressure, aortic velocity and diameter measurements in the outflow tract, and echocardiography with tissue Doppler imaging.

RESULTS

In multivariate models, stroke work showed markedly stronger relations with LVM index (LVMI) than blood pressure load [central arterial SBP (SBPc), backward wave pressure (Pb), 24-h SBP] (P < 0.0001 for comparisons). In contrast, although SBPc, Pb, and 24-h SBP were inversely associated with myocardial tissue shortening (s') and lengthening (e') velocity, stroke work was not. With adjustments for stroke work, positive relationships between SBPc, Pb, or 24-h SBP and LVMI were eliminated (P = 0.20 to P = 0.89), but strong relations between BP and s', e' or E/e' (P = 0.009 to P < 0.0001) remained. In mediation analysis, stroke work fully accounted for BP effects on LVMI, but explained none of the effects of BP on LV function. Hence LVMI accounted for little of the impact of BP load on LV function. Although LVMI beyond stroke work (inappropriate LVM) improved on relations between LVMI and s', it failed to improve on relations with e' or E/e' and contributed little beyond LVMI to the impact of BP on LV function.

CONCLUSION

In systemic flow-dependent hypertension, the impact of stroke work markedly limits the ability of LVM to account for adverse effects of hypertension on LV function.

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension in people without prior cerebrovascular disease for the prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006 (McGuinness 2006), and previously updated in 2009 (McGuinness 2009). Hypertension is a risk factor for dementia. Observational studies suggest antihypertensive treatment is associated with lower incidences of cognitive impairment and dementia. There is already clear evidence to support the treatment of hypertension after stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether pharmacological treatment of hypertension can prevent cognitive impairment or dementia in people who have no history of cerebrovascular disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources, most recently on 7 July 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which pharmacological interventions to treat hypertension were given for at least 12 months. We excluded trials of pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure in non-hypertensive participants. We also excluded trials conducted solely in people with stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information regarding incidence of dementia, cognitive decline, change in blood pressure, adverse effects and quality of life. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies, totaling 30,412 participants, in this review. Eight studies compared active treatment with placebo. Of the four non-placebo-controlled studies, two compared intensive versus standard blood pressure reduction. The two final included studies compared different classes of antihypertensive drug. Study durations varied from one to five years. The combined result of four placebo-controlled trials that reported incident dementia indicated no evidence of a difference in the risk of dementia between the antihypertensive treatment group and the placebo group (236/7767 versus 259/7660, odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.09; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to study limitations and indirectness). The combined results from five placebo-controlled trials that reported change in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) may indicate a modest benefit from antihypertensive treatment (mean difference (MD) 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to study limitations, indirectness and imprecision). The certainty of evidence for both cognitive outcomes was downgraded on the basis of study limitations and indirectness. Study durations were too short, overall, to expect a significant difference in dementia rates between groups. Dementia and cognitive decline were secondary outcomes for most studies. Additional sources of bias include: the use of antihypertensive medication by the placebo group in the placebo-controlled trials; failure to reach recruitment targets; and early termination of studies on safety grounds. Meta-analysis of the placebo-controlled trials reporting results found a mean change in systolic blood pressure of -9.25 mmHg (95% CI -9.73, -8.78) between treatment (n = 8973) and placebo (n = 8820) groups, and a mean change in diastolic blood pressure of -2.47 mmHg (95% CI -2.70, -2.24) between treatment (n = 7700) and placebo (n = 7509) groups (both low certainty evidence downgraded on the basis of study limitations and inconsistency). Three trials - SHEP 1991, LOMIR MCT IL 1996 and MRC 1996 - reported more withdrawals due to adverse events in active treatment groups than placebo groups. Participants on active treatment in Syst Eur 1998 were less likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects, and participants on active treatment in HYVET 2008 reported fewer 'serious adverse events' than in the placebo group. There was no evidence of a difference in withdrawals rates between groups in SCOPE 2003, and results were unclear for Perez Stable 2000 and Zhang 2018. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Five of the placebo-controlled trials provided quality of life (QOL) data. Heterogeneity again precluded meta-analysis. SHEP 1991, Syst Eur 1998 and HYVET 2008 reported no evidence of a difference in QOL measures between active treatment and placebo groups over time. The SCOPE 2003 sub-study (Degl'Innocenti 2004) showed a smaller drop in QOL measures in the active treatment compared to the placebo group. LOMIR MCT IL 1996 reported an improvement in a QOL measure at twelve months in one active treatment group and deterioration in another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High certainty randomised controlled trial evidence regarding the effect of hypertension treatment on dementia and cognitive decline does not yet exist. The studies included in this review provide low certainty evidence (downgraded primarily due to study limitations and indirectness) that pharmacological treatment of hypertension, in people without prior cerebrovascular disease, leads to less cognitive decline compared to controls. This difference is below the level considered clinically significant. The studies included in this review also provide very low certainty evidence that pharmacological treatment of hypertension, in people without prior cerebrovascular disease, prevents dementia.

Hypertension in older persons: why one size does not fit all

Over recent years, managing hypertension in older people has gained increasing attention, with particular reference to very old, frailer individuals. In these patients, hypertension treatment may be challenging due to a higher risk of hypotension-related adverse events which commonly overlaps with a higher cardiovascular risk. Additionally, frailer older adults rarely satisfy inclusion criteria of randomized clinical trials, which determines a substantial lack of scientific data. Although limited, available evidence suggests that the association between blood pressure and adverse outcomes significantly varies at advanced age according to frailty status. In particular, the negative prognostic impact of hypertension seems to attenuate or even revert in individuals with older biological age, e.g. patients with disability, cognitive impairment, and poor physical performance. Consequently, one size doesn't fit all and personalized treatment strategies are needed, customized to individuals' frailty and functional status. Similar to other cardiovascular diseases, hypertension management in older people should be characterized by a geriatric approach based on biological rather than chronological age and a geriatric comprehensive evaluation including frailty assessment is required to provide the most appropriate treatment, tailored to patients' prognosis and health care goals. This review illustrates the importance of a patient-centered geriatric approach to hypertension management in older people with the final purpose to promote a wider implementation of frailty assessment in routine practice.

The Effect of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Therapy on Obstructive Sleep Apnea-Related Hypertension

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disease, with approximately 3-7% of men and 2-5% of women worldwide suffering from symptomatic OSA. If OSA is left untreated, hypoxia, microarousals and increased chemoreceptor stimulation can lead to complications like hypertension (HT). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the most common treatment for OSA, and it works by generating airway patency, which will counteract the apnea or hypopnea. More than one billion people in the world suffer from HT, and the usual treatment is pharmacological with antihypertensive medication (AHM). The focus of this review will be to investigate whether the CPAP therapy for OSA affects HT.

Hypertension management in frail older adults: a gap in evidence

Hypertension management is challenging in frail older adults. The balance between treatment risks and benefits may be difficult to achieve due to an increased vulnerability to treatment-related adverse events, and limited evidence is available to support clinical decisions. The effects of frailty on blood pressure are unclear, as well as its impact on antihypertensive treatment benefits. Appropriate blood pressure targets in frail patients are debated and the frailty measure which best inform clinical decisions in hypertensive patients has yet to be identified. Therefore, hypertension management in frail older adults still represents a 'gap in evidence'. Knowledge of currently available literature is a fundamental prerequisite to develop future research and may help to implement frailty assessment and improve hypertension management in this vulnerable population. Given these premises, we present a narrative review illustrating the most relevant issues that are a matter of debate and that should be addressed in future studies.

Updates in Hypertension Studies According to the Main Clinical Trials: A Review of the Past 45 Years about Pharmaceutical Intervention Effects

BACKGROUND

High blood pressure remains one of the most important risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Although there is no consensus, all the clinical practice guidelines agree on the need to reduce blood pressure levels to minimize the risks. There are many clinical trials conducted to try to find the best pharmacotherapy to achieve this goal. The aim was to compare the main international randomized clinical trials on hypertension in people older than 50 years.

METHODS

Literature qualitative review of randomized clinical trials selected from PubMed and UpToDate in people older than 50 years, from 1985 until 2020. The clinical trials conducted during this period show variability in the drugs used, the inclusion criteria for blood pressure figures, and the consideration or not of other vascular risk factors (smoking, obesity, lipid disorders, diabetes, and physical inactivity).

RESULTS

Of the 8334 articles found, 19 of them fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria that involved 202,638 people. The main findings of each investigation were grouped as follows: incidence of non-cardiovascular death, death of cardiovascular origin, coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, renal failure, and hypertensive retinopathy. In all patients, blood pressure figures were reduced, although this did not always lead to statistically significant differences in morbidity and/or mortality risk reduction. Twelve of them found risk reduction as an effect of reduced blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomized clinical trials conducted on hypertension in people older than 50 years of age show variability in the inclusion criteria. Variability in the antihypertensive drugs used was observed in this population. Blood pressure figures were reduced in all cases, although without statistically significant differences in morbidity and/or mortality risk reduction.

Hypertension management in older adults

Vascular aging leads to arterial hypertension, which is the leading cause of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in older adults. Blood pressure reduction is effective in reducing the cardiovascular risk and is safe in ambulatory older adults. It is important to note that blood pressure control in this group of patients is challenging because of comorbidities, polypharmacy, and frailty. Choice of pharmacotherapy is not simple and should be individualized.

Prior Beta-Blocker Therapy for Hypertension and Sex-Based Differences in Heart Failure Among Patients With Incident Coronary Heart Disease

The usefulness of β-blockers has been questioned for patients who have hypertension without a prior manifestation of coronary heart disease or heart failure. In addition, sex-based differences in the efficacy of β-blockers for prevention of heart failure during acute myocardial ischemia have never been evaluated. We explored whether the effect of β-blocker therapy varied according to the sex among patients with hypertension who have no prior history of cardiovascular disease. Data were drawn from the ISACS (International Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes)-Archives. The study population consisted of 13 764 patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes. There were 2590 patients in whom hypertension was treated previously with β-blocker (954 women and 1636 men). Primary outcome measure was the incidence of heart failure according to Killip class classification. Subsidiary analyses were conducted to estimate the association between heart failure and all-cause mortality at 30 days. Outcome rates were assessed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting and logistic regression models. Estimates were compared by test of interaction on the log scale. Among patients taking β-blockers before admission, there was an absolute difference of 4.6% between women and men in the rate of heart failure (Killip ≥2) at hospital presentation (21.3% versus 16.7%; relative risk ratio, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.10-1.65]). On the opposite, the rate of heart failure was approximately similar among women and men who did not receive β-blockers (17.2% versus 16.1%; relative risk ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.97-1.21]). The test of interaction identified a significant (P=0.034) association between sex and β-blocker therapy. Heart failure was predictive of mortality at 30-day either in women (odds ratio, 7.54 [95% CI, 5.78-9.83]) or men (odds ratio, 9.62 [95% CI, 7.67-12.07]). In conclusion, β-blockers use may be an acute precipitant of heart failure in new-onset coronary heart disease among women, but not men. Heart failure increases the risk of death. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04008173.

Blood pressure control in older adults with hypertension: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression

Background

Managing blood pressure reduces CVD risk, but optimal treatment thresholds remain unclear as it is a balancing act to avoid hypotension-related adverse events.

Objectives

This systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression evaluated the benefits of intensive BP treatment in hypertensive older adults.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials until January 31, 2020. Studies comparing different BP treatments/targets and/or active BP against placebo treatment, with a minimum 12 months follow-up, were included. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs were calculated using a random effects model. The primary outcome was RR of major cardiovascular events (MCEs); secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and all-cause mortality.

Results

We included 16 studies totaling 65,890 hypertensive participants (average age 69.4 years) with a follow-up period from 1.8 to 4.9 years. Intensive BP treatment significantly reduced the relative risk of MCEs by 26% (RR:0.74, 95%CI 0.64–0.86, p = 0.000; I² = 79.71%). RR of MI significantly reduced by 13% (RR:0.87, 95%CI 0.76–1.00, p = 0.052; I² = 0.00%), stroke by 28% (RR:0.72, 95%CI 0.64–0.82, p = 0.000; I² = 32.45%), HF by 47% (RR:0.53, 95% CI 0.43–0.66, p = 0.000; I² = 1.23%), and CV mortality by 24% (RR:0.76, 95%CI 0.66–0.89, p = 0.000; I² = 39.74%). All-cause mortality reduced by 17% (RR:0.83, 95%CI 0.73–0.93, p = 0.001; I² = 53.09%). Of the participants - 61% reached BP targets and 5% withdrew; with 1 hypotension-related event per 780 people treated.

Conclusions

Lower BP treatment targets are optimal for CV protection, effective, well-tolerated and safe, and support the latest hypertension guidelines.

•

Question: What is the optimal blood pressure target in older adults with hypertension?

•

Findings: Intensive blood pressure treatment reduces RR of MCEs and all-cause mortality; it is well tolerated and safe.

•

Meaning: Systolic BP targets of <130 mmHg are optimal for cardiovascular protection & support the ACC/AHA hypertension guidelines.

Treatment strategies for isolated systolic hypertension in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is a major and modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Its prevalence is rising as the result of population aging. Isolated systolic hypertension mostly occurs in older patients accounting for up to 80% of cases.

AREAS COVERED

The authors systematically review published studies to appraise the scientific and clinical evidence supporting the role of blood pressure control in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension, and to assess the influence of different drug treatment regimens on outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Antihypertensive treatment of isolated systolic hypertension significantly reduces the risk of morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Thiazide diuretics and dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers are the primary compounds used in randomized clinical trials. These drugs can be considered as first-line agents for the management of isolated systolic hypertension. Free or fixed combination therapy with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers and calcium-channel blockers or thiazide-like diuretics should also be considered, particularly when compelling indications such as coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and congestive heart failure coexist. There is also hot scientific debate on the optimal blood pressure target to be achieved in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension, but current recommendations are scarcely supported by evidence.

Update on Hypertension and Adaptations for Treatment

Hypertension (HTN) affects 46% of the US adult population and plays a major role in cardiovascular disease (CVD). Approximately, there were 90,098 deaths in 2017 primarily attributed to high blood pressure (BP). Recent guidelines recommend screening all adults for HTN. Management of elevated BP substantially reduces the risk of heart failure, stroke, and myocardial infarction. Recommended lifestyle modifications include weight loss for overweight or obese patients, regular exercise, the dietary approached to stop hypertension (DASH) diet, reduced dietary sodium intake, and reduced alcohol intake. Most HTN patients will need at least 2 drugs to control BP. Current guidelines from the ACC and AHA state that a BP level goal of < 130/80mmHg for adults with confirmed HTN and without additional markers of increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk may be acceptable.

Management of hypertension in the very old: an intensive reduction of blood pressure should be achieved in most patients

There is large evidence that treatment of hypertension significantly reduces the risk of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Although it is generally accepted that the benefit of antihypertensive treatment is largely explained by the reduction in systolic blood pressure, the optimal blood pressure target in elderly patients is still a topic of debate. Unfortunately, the clinical trials which demonstrated the benefit of antihypertensive treatment in old and very old patients with hypertension included relatively fit patients since frail patients were generally excluded. Available data suggest that when treating older adults, and especially frail older hypertensive adults, extra caution is appropriate in the setting of significant adverse events. Nonetheless, recent observations demonstrated a similar benefit from a more intensive compared with a less intensive blood pressure lowering in both fit and frail older adults. Of note, the rate of serious adverse events appears not dissimilar in the two treatment strategies, and not associated to frailty. Taken together, these findings support the concept that an intensive therapeutic strategy appears reasonable even in elderly hypertensive patients, particularly when the treatment is well tolerated.

Management of hypertension in the very old: aggressive reduction of blood pressure is harmful in most patients

Arterial hypertension is particularly prevalent in the elderly and treatment is required according to the literature. Treatment in subjects between 65 and 80 years of age resembles by characteristics and results that obtained in younger population. The treatment of arterial hypertension in the very elderly differs in a relevant percentage of them. It is quite similar in those with a good physical fitness with or without cardiovascular disease. A series of factors as the presence of real sustained hypertension, orthostatic hypotension, frailty and disability, and the boundary of safety recommended by international recent guidelines analysed here are relevant to characterize a clearly elevated risk of complications in the remaining very elderly patients.

Effects of blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular events, in the context of regression to the mean: a systematic review of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical relevance of regression to the mean for clinical trials and clinical practice.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched until February 2018 for randomized trials of BP lowering with over 1000 patient-years follow-up per group. We estimated baseline mean BP, follow-up mean (usual) BP amongst patients grouped by 10 mmHg strata of baseline BP, and assessed effects of BP lowering on coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke according to these BP levels.

RESULTS

Eighty-six trials (349 488 participants), with mean follow-up of 3.7 years, were included. Most mean BP change was because of regression to the mean rather than treatment. At high baseline BP levels, even after rigorous hypertension diagnosis, downwards regression to the mean caused much of the fall in BP. At low baseline BP levels, upwards regression to the mean increased BP levels, even in treatment groups. Overall, a BP reduction of 6/3 mmHg lowered CHD by 14% (95% CI 11-17%) and stroke by 18% (15-22%), and these treatment effects occurred at follow-up BP levels much closer to the mean than baseline BP levels. In particular, more evidence was available in the SBP 130-139 mmHg range than any other range. Benefits were apparent in numerous high-risk patient groups with baseline mean SBP less than 140 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

Clinical practice should focus less on pretreatment BP levels, which rarely predict future untreated BP levels or rule out capacity to benefit from BP lowering in high cardiovascular risk patients. Instead, focus should be on prompt, empirical treatment to maintain lower BP for those with high BP and/or high risk.

Progression of Arterial Stiffness is Associated With Midlife Diastolic Blood Pressure and Transition to Late-Life Hypertensive Phenotypes

Background

Hypertension‐associated cardiovascular events are particularly associated with elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) in late life, yet long‐term interactions between SBP, diastolic BP (DBP) and arterial stiffness in development of late‐life hypertensive phenotypes remain unclear.

Methods and Results

In the UK Biobank, we determined associations between arterial stiffness index (ASI), SBP, DBP, and their progression, and transition from normotension (<140/90 mm Hg) to hypertension or elevated ASI (>10 m/s). Associations were determined by general linear and logistic regression, adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors and variability of measurements across follow‐ups. Mean values of baseline SBP, DBP, and ASI were determined stratified by deciles of age, blood pressure, and ASI, with CIs determined by bootstrapping. In 169 742 participants at baseline, ASI was more strongly associated with DBP than SBP, before and after adjustment for risk factors (β: SBP, −0.01 [P<0.001]; DBP, 0.06 [P<0.001]), while DBP was more strongly associated with progression of ASI (n=13 761; β: SBP, 0.013 [P=0.01]; DBP, 0.038 [P<0.001]). Baseline ASI was associated with increasing SBP during follow‐up (β=0.02, P<0.001) but not DBP (β=0.0004, P=0.39), but was associated with a younger age of transition from rising to falling DBP (highest versus lowest quartile: 51.2; 95% CI, 49.9–52.3 versus 60.4; 95% CI, 59.6–61.3 [P<0.001]). ASI predicted the development of isolated systolic hypertension (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.22–1.39), particularly after adjustment for measurement variability (odds ratio, 2.29).

Conclusions

Midlife DBP was the strongest predictor of progression of arterial stiffness, while arterial stiffness was associated with earlier transition to a falling DBP. Prevention of long‐term harms associated with arterial stiffness may require more intensive control of midlife DBP.

Going Beyond the Guidelines in Individualising the Use of Antihypertensive Drugs in Older Patients

Hypertension is commonly diagnosed in older patients, with increasing cardiovascular (CV) risk as systolic blood pressure (BP) increases. Maximising CV risk reduction must be reconciled with minimising the risk of treatment-related harms and burden, especially among frail, multi-morbid and older old patients who have been excluded from most randomised trials. Contemporary clinical guidelines, based on such trials, differ in their recommendations as to threshold levels warranting treatment with antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) and target levels that should be achieved. In optimising AHD prescribing in older patients, we propose the following decision framework: decide therapeutic goals in accordance with patient characteristics and preferences; estimate absolute CV risk; measure and profile BP accurately in ways that account for lability in BP levels and minimise error in BP measurement; determine threshold and target BP levels likely to confer net benefit, taking into account age, co-morbidities, frailty and cognitive function; and consider situations that warrant AHD deprescribing on the basis of potential current or future harm. In applying this framework to older persons, and based on a review of relevant randomised trials and observational studies, individuals most likely to benefit from treating systolic BP to no less than 130 mmHg are those of any age who are fit and have high baseline systolic BP (≥ 160 mmHg); high CV risk, i.e. established CV disease or risk of CV events exceeding 20% at 10 years; previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack; heart failure; and stage 3-4 chronic kidney disease with proteinuria. Individuals most likely to be harmed from treating BP to target systolic < 140 mmHg are those who have no CV disease and aged over 80 years; moderate to severe frailty, cognitive impairment or functional limitations; labile BP and/or history of orthostatic hypotension, syncope and falls; or life expectancy < 12 months. Treatment should never be so intense as to reduce diastolic BP to < 60 mmHg in any older person. At a time when guidelines are calling for less conservative management of hypertension in all age groups, we contend that a more temperate approach, such as that offered here and based on the totality of available evidence, may assist in maximising net benefit in older patients.

From Clinical Trials to Bedside: the Use of Antihypertensives in Aged Individuals. Part 1: Evaluation and Evidence of Treatment Benefit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Use of antihypertensives in older adults can be complicated by the potential for undesired effects on comorbidities, adverse effects of the drugs, and overall medication burden. The purpose of this two-part review is to discuss contemporary issues encountered in the management of hypertension in aged individuals, with a particular focus on the individualization of treatment. In part 1, we discuss the evaluation of the aged hypertensive patient and review the clinical trial evidence for treatment benefit of hypertension in the elderly.

RECENT FINDINGS

Elderly patients with suspected hypertension need careful evaluation of their blood pressure, as errors in measurement technique, inaccurate devices, or overreliance on office blood pressure readings may lead to under- or over-treatment, thereby increasing risks of adverse medication effects and/or cardiovascular events. Epidemiologic evidence in older adults suggests a link between low blood pressure and increased mortality. However, key prospective hypertension trials such as HYVET and SPRINT, which were focused in mostly healthy, community-dwelling elderly cohorts, have unequivocally demonstrated benefits of lowering blood pressure in reducing cardiovascular events in the very elderly. Recent evidence also suggests benefit in reducing the risks of cognitive impairment. Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor and the benefits of treatment in lowering cardiovascular events are realized for most individuals, even at advanced ages.

Efficacy and toxicity of antihypertensive pharmacotherapy relative to effective dose 50

Antihypertensive drugs have usually been approved at doses near the top of their respective dose-response curves. Efficacy plateaus but adverse drug reactions (ADRs), such as falls, cerebral or renal ischaemia, increase as dose is increased, especially in older patients with comorbidities. ADRs reduce adherence and may be difficult to ascertain reliably. Higher doses have generally not been shown to reduce total mortality, which provides a summary of efficacy and safety. Weight loss and other lifestyle measures are essential and may be sufficient treatment in many young and low risk patients. Most antihypertensive drug lower systolic blood pressure by around 10 mmHg, which reduces stroke and heart failure by about a quarter. Clinical trials have not been designed to demonstrate specific blood pressure treatment thresholds and targets, which are mostly extrapolated from epidemiology. Mean population oral effective dose 50 may be the most appropriate dose at which to commence antihypertensive drugs. The dose can then be titrated up if greater efficacy is demonstrated, or lowered if ADRs develop. Lower dose combination therapy may best balance benefit and harms with fewer ADRs and additive, potentially synergistic, efficacy.

Role of Beta-blockers in Cardiovascular Disease in 2019

Beta-blockers are the cornerstone of treatment for various cardiovascular conditions. Although their effects have classically been considered to be driven by their antagonistic and competitive action on beta-adrenergic receptors, nowadays it is known that their effect goes beyond that of mere competition with catecholamines on these receptors. Beta-blockers were discovered as antianginal drugs in the 1960s and are currently widely used in heart failure, arrhythmias, and ischemic heart disease. In this article, we review the evidence for the beneficial effects of beta-blockers in these conditions, as well as the current recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for their use. Surprisingly, despite having been prescribed for more than 4 decades, new, previously unnoticed mechanisms of action on cellular compartments are still being discovered, which continues to open up new horizons for their use. All in all, beta-blockers are one of the most fascinating drug groups in our therapeutic armamentarium.

Treatment of Hypertension in Complex Older Adults: How Many Medications Are Needed?

Background: Many older adults with hypertension receive multiple antihypertensives. It is unclear whether treatment with several antihypertensive classes results in greater cardiovascular benefits than fewer antihypertensive classes. Objectives: We investigated (a) the longitudinal associations between treatment with ≥ 3 versus 1-2 classes and death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and (b) whether these associations varied by the presence of mobility disability. Methods: We included 6,011 treated hypertensive adults ≥65 from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a nationally representative community sample. Times to MACE and death were compared between those receiving ≥3 versus 1-2 classes using multivariable proportional hazards regression. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for indication and contraindication bias. Results: There were no significant differences in the risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96, p = .769) or MACE (HR = 1.10, p = .574) between the exposure groups, and there were no significant exposure × mobility disability interactions. Discussion: We found no benefit of ≥3 versus 1-2 antihypertensive classes in reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in a representative cohort of older adults, raising concern about the added benefit of additional antihypertensives in the real world.

Blood pressure lowering medication initiation and fracture risk: a SWAN pharmacoepidemiology study

We examined the fracture risk after initiation of blood pressure-lowering drugs compared with initiation of antidepressants. Multivariable regression models demonstrated an increased risk of fracture among women initiating a blood pressure-lowering medication (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.02-2.95). This is likely related to an increased risk of falls.

PURPOSE

Initiation of blood pressure-lowering drugs has been associated with fractures in several studies, presumably due to an increase in the risk of falls. However, these studies used self-controlled designs without active comparators. We examined the risk of fractures after initiation of blood pressure lowering drugs compared with initiation of antidepressants.

METHODS

Women participants in the Study of Women Across the Nation (SWAN) were potentially eligible if they initiated blood pressure-lowering or antidepressant drugs during follow-up. To reduce the risk of confounding, we estimated a propensity score that included potential confounders including age, menopausal status, osteoporosis, and osteoporosis medication use. The propensity score was used to match subjects in both groups and we then constructed multivariable logistic regression models comparing the risk of any fracture. Sensitivity analyses assessed a limited range of fractures less likely related to trauma.

RESULTS

Among the 3302 potentially eligible women participating in the SWAN cohort, we were able to propensity-score match 289 women who initiated a blood pressure-lowering medication with 289 who initiated an antidepressant. Multivariable logistic regression models demonstrated an increased risk of fracture among women initiating a blood pressure lowering medication (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.02-2.95). After excluding fractures of the digits and face, the results were similar (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.88-2.81).

CONCLUSIONS

There was evidence of an increased risk in fractures among women initiating blood pressure-lowering medications compared to those initiating antidepressants. This is likely related to an increased risk of falling.

Effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality: 14 - effects of different classes of antihypertensive drugs in older and younger patients: overview and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The five major classes of blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs have all been shown to significantly reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events when compared with placebo, and when directly (head-to-head) compared, no significant differences in their overall effectiveness have been detected, except for minor differences in cause-specific events. It is unknown, however, whether age-related differences exist and if some classes of drugs are differently effective in older or younger individuals. This clinically relevant question has been the object of a systematic search and meta-analysis of all available data.

METHODS

Two databases we had previously identified [72 placebo-controlled BP-lowering randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in 260 210 individuals and 50 RCTs head-to-head comparing treatments with BP-lowering drugs of different classes in 247 006 individuals) were searched for separately reported data on patients older or younger than 65 years, and the data were further stratified according to the class of drug [diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers] compared with placebo or with other drug classes. Seven fatal and nonfatal outcomes were considered for benefits. Adverse events were investigated as permanent treatment discontinuations for adverse events. Risk ratios and absolute risk changes were calculated by a random effects model. Effects at older and younger ages were compared by heterogeneity test.

RESULTS

We identified 20 placebo-controlled RCTs on 55 645 older individuals and 21 on 99 621 younger individuals, and 21 head-to-head drug comparison RCTs on 94 228 older individuals and 27 on 100 232 younger individuals (for a total of 349 726 individuals). When compared with placebo, all five classes of BP-lowering drugs significantly reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events or stroke, with no significant difference between older and younger patients. However, in head-to-head comparisons, no significant difference was found between older and younger patients in the effects of diuretics, calcium antagonists, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on all cardiovascular outcomes, whereas beta-blockers revealed an age-dependent effectiveness, being equally effective as the other agents at an age below 65 years, but less effective at an older age.

CONCLUSION

Most BP-lowering classes are equally effective in preventing risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events both in older and younger patients, whereas beta-blockers, though being equally effective as the other agents in patients younger than 65, loose some of their effectiveness at an older age.

Effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality: 13 - benefits and adverse events in older and younger patients with hypertension: overview, meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

There is overwhelming evidence that blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment can reduce cardiovascular outcomes also in the elderly, but some important aspects influencing medical practice are controversial as sufficient evidence has not been provided by single randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whereas evidence may result from a systematic search and meta-analysis of all available data.

OBJECTIVES

The following clinically relevant issues concerning the effects of BP lowering in older and younger individuals have been investigated: differences in benefits; the oldest and the youngest age range for which evidence of BP-lowering effects is available; the SBP level at which BP-lowering treatment should be initiated; the SBP and DBP levels treatment should be aimed at; differences in treatment burdens and harms.

METHODS

A database we previously identified of 72 BP-lowering RCTs in 260 210 patients was searched for separately reported data on older and younger individuals [cutoffs of 65 (primary analyses), 70, 75, 80, 60 and 55 years). The data were further stratified according to the levels of baseline (untreated) BP, and of on-treatment achieved SBP or DBP. Seven fatal and nonfatal outcomes were considered for benefits. Burdens and harms were investigated as permanent treatment discontinuations for adverse events, and hypotension/syncope. Risk ratios and absolute risk changes were calculated by a random effects model. Effects at older and younger ages were compared by heterogeneity test.

RESULTS

Thirty-two RCTs provided data on 96 549 patients older than 65 years, and 31 RCTs on 114 009 patients younger than 65 years. All cardiovascular outcomes were significantly reduced by treatment both in older and younger individuals, without significant age-dependent differences in relative risk reduction but with significantly higher absolute risk reductions in older individuals. The extreme age ranges for which evidence of significant benefits of treatment were available was greater than 80 and less than 55 years. Only one RCT provided data on benefits of BP-lowering at age greater than 65 when treatment was initiated at SBP values in the grade 1 range, but more consistent evidence was provided when age was greater than 60 years. Both in patients older and younger than 65 years, significant reductions of cardiovascular outcomes were found at on-treatment SBP less than 140 mmHg and DBP less than 80 mmHg. There was no evidence that treatment discontinuations for adverse events or hypotension/syncope were more frequent at age greater than 65.

CONCLUSION

Antihypertensive treatment should be recommended to all individuals with elevated BP, independent of age. The prudent recommendation to initiate treatment at SBP values 140-159 mmHg is supported at older age defined as greater than 60 years. SBP and DBP values lower than 140 mmHg and, respectively, 80 mmHg can be aimed at with incremental benefits without disproportionate burdens until age 80 years, above which available evidence is for benefits at on-treatment SBP 140-149 mmHg.

Pharmacotherapy for hypertension in adults 60 years or older

BACKGROUND

This is the second substantive update of this review. It was originally published in 1998 and was previously updated in 2009. Elevated blood pressure (known as 'hypertension') increases with age - most rapidly over age 60. Systolic hypertension is more strongly associated with cardiovascular disease than is diastolic hypertension, and it occurs more commonly in older people. It is important to know the benefits and harms of antihypertensive treatment for hypertension in this age group, as well as separately for people 60 to 79 years old and people 80 years or older.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective• To quantify the effects of antihypertensive drug treatment as compared with placebo or no treatment on all-cause mortality in people 60 years and older with mild to moderate systolic or diastolic hypertensionSecondary objectives• To quantify the effects of antihypertensive drug treatment as compared with placebo or no treatment on cardiovascular-specific morbidity and mortality in people 60 years and older with mild to moderate systolic or diastolic hypertension• To quantify the rate of withdrawal due to adverse effects of antihypertensive drug treatment as compared with placebo or no treatment in people 60 years and older with mild to moderate systolic or diastolic hypertension SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to 24 November 2017: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE Ovid (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least one year's duration comparing antihypertensive drug therapy versus placebo or no treatment and providing morbidity and mortality data for adult patients (≥ 60 years old) with hypertension defined as blood pressure greater than 140/90 mmHg.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality; cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality; coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality; and withdrawal due to adverse effects. We modified the definition of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity to exclude transient ischaemic attacks when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes one additional trial (MRC-TMH 1985). Sixteen trials (N = 26,795) in healthy ambulatory adults 60 years or older (mean age 73.4 years) from western industrialised countries with moderate to severe systolic and/or diastolic hypertension (average 182/95 mmHg) met the inclusion criteria. Most of these trials evaluated first-line thiazide diuretic therapy for a mean treatment duration of 3.8 years.Antihypertensive drug treatment reduced all-cause mortality (high-certainty evidence; 11% with control vs 10.0% with treatment; risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 0.97; cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (moderate-certainty evidence; 13.6% with control vs 9.8% with treatment; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.77; cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity (moderate-certainty evidence; 5.2% with control vs 3.4% with treatment; RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.74; and coronary heart disease mortality and morbidity (moderate-certainty evidence; 4.8% with control vs 3.7% with treatment; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.88. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were increased with treatment (low-certainty evidence; 5.4% with control vs 15.7% with treatment; RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.56 to 3.30. In the three trials restricted to persons with isolated systolic hypertension, reported benefits were similar.This comprehensive systematic review provides additional evidence that the reduction in mortality observed was due mostly to reduction in the 60- to 79-year-old patient subgroup (high-certainty evidence; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.95). Although cardiovascular mortality and morbidity was significantly reduced in both subgroups 60 to 79 years old (moderate-certainty evidence; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.77) and 80 years or older (moderate-certainty evidence; RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87), the magnitude of absolute risk reduction was probably higher among 60- to 79-year-old patients (3.8% vs 2.9%). The reduction in cardiovascular mortality and morbidity was primarily due to a reduction in cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treating healthy adults 60 years or older with moderate to severe systolic and/or diastolic hypertension with antihypertensive drug therapy reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity, and coronary heart disease mortality and morbidity. Most evidence of benefit pertains to a primary prevention population using a thiazide as first-line treatment.

Hypertension Management in the Elderly: What is the Optimal Target Blood Pressure?

Hypertension is a common disease in the elderly associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Due to the complexity of this population, the optimal target of blood pressure (BP) control is still controversial. In this article, we conduct a literature review of trials published in English in the last 10 years which were specifically designed to study the efficacy and safety of various BP targets in patients who are 70 years or older. Using these criteria, we found that the benefits in the positive studies were demonstrated even with a minimal BP control (systolic BP [SBP] <150 mmHg) and continued to be reported for a SBP <120 mmHg. On the other hand, keeping SBP <140 mmHg seemed to be safely achieved in elderly patients. Although the safety of lowering SBP to <120 mmHg is debated, Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial study has shown no increased risk of falls, fractures, or kidney failure in elderly patients with SBP lower than this threshold. While the recent guidelines recommended to keep BP <130/80 mmHg in the elderly, more individualized approach should be considered to achieve this goal in order to avoid undesirable complications. Furthermore, further studies are required to evaluate BP target in very old patients or those with multiple comorbidities.

Antihypertensive Agents in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review summarizes the benefits of treating blood pressure (BP) in individuals 65 years and older.

METHODS

We included randomized trials that evaluated BP-lowering medications or BP targets in individuals 65 years and older. Trials were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers.

RESULTS

We included 19 trials (42,134 patients). In individuals 65 years or older, antihypertensive therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [relative risk: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 to 0.94); high certainty evidence; mean follow-up 31 months], cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. Individuals 75 years or older had a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and heart failure. Strict systolic BP targets (<120 mm Hg and <130 mm Hg) were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and heart failure, whereas more liberal systolic targets (<150 mm Hg and <160 mm Hg) were associated with lower risk of heart failure and stroke. Older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) had lower risk of chronic kidney disease without a significant reduction in other outcomes. However, there was no significant difference in estimates (i.e., interaction) between those with and without DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals aged 65 years and older or 75 years and older who receive antihypertensive therapy have statistically significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and stroke. There was no statistically significant difference in estimates between those with and without DM.

Evolution of Blood Pressure Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Personal Perspective

Before the second half of the 20th century, most clinical decision making was based on expert opinion. By the 1960s, experience in actuarial and research cohort studies had provided strong evidence that blood pressure was an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The landmark 1967 and 1970 Veterans Administration Cooperative Study trials confirmed the value of antihypertensive drug therapy in preventing stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure in adults with high levels of diastolic blood pressure. They also provided an impetus to develop the first blood-pressure-related clinical practice guideline in 1977. In subsequent years, more structured and comprehensive blood-pressure guidelines have evolved to become a major resource in clinical and public health practice. Despite some limitations, these guidelines provide useful evidence-based guidance for diagnosis and management of high blood pressure. The core advice in most of the current comprehensive blood pressure guidelines is more similar than different. Modelling studies suggest that better adherence to guideline recommendations would result in a lower average blood pressure and substantial improvement in public health.