Effects of blood pressure-lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: 5. Head-to-head comparisons of various classes of antihypertensive drugs - overview and meta-analyses. J Hypertens. 2015;33:1321-1341. [PMID: 26039526 DOI: 10.1097/hjh.0000000000000614]

Outpatient management of essential hypertension: a review based on the latest clinical guidelines

Background: Essential hypertension, a prevalent cardiovascular condition, poses a significant health burden worldwide. Based on the latest American clinical guidelines, half of adults in the United States have hypertension. Of these, only about a half are treated and about a quarter are adequately controlled for hypertension. Given its impact on morbidity and mortality, ensuring effective management of high blood pressure is crucial to reduce associated risks and improve patient outcomes.Objective: This review aims to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date summary of the latest cardiology guidelines and evidence-based research on essential hypertension, with a focus on guiding outpatient clinical practice.Methods: The review evaluates both non-pharmacological approaches and pharmacological interventions to offer clinicians practical insights. Notably, it emphasizes the importance of individualized treatment plans tailored to patients' specific risk profiles and comorbidities.Results: By consolidating the latest advancements in hypertension management, this review provides clinicians with an up-to-date reference, offering a nuanced understanding of treatment goals and strategies.Conclusion: Through the incorporation of evidence-based recommendations, healthcare practitioners can optimize patient care, mitigate potential complications, and improve overall outcomes in essential hypertension.

Clinical outcome in hypertensive patients treated with amlodipine plus bisoprolol or plus valsartan

OBJECTIVE

Several guidelines do not recommend beta-blocker as the first-line treatment for hypertension because of its inferior efficacy in stroke prevention. Combination therapy with beta-blocker is commonly used for blood pressure control. We compared the clinical outcomes in patients treated with amlodipine plus bisoprolol (A + B), a ß1-selective beta-blocker and amlodipine plus valsartan (A + V).

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was performed using data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. From 2012 to 2019, newly diagnosed adult hypertensive patients who received initial amlodipine monotherapy and then switched to A + V or A + B were included. The efficacy outcomes included all-cause death, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and coronary revascularization), hemorrhagic stroke, and heart failure. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the relationship between outcomes and different treatments.

RESULTS

Overall, 4311 patients in A + B group and 10980 patients in A + V group were included. After a mean follow-up of 4.34 ± 1.79 years, the efficacy outcomes were similar between the A + V and A + B groups regarding all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-1.18), ASCVD event (aHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.12), and heart failure (aHR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87-1.30). The risk of hemorrhagic stroke was lower in A + B group (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.94). The result was similar when taking death into consideration in competing risk analysis. The safety outcomes were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference of all-cause death, ASCVD event, and heart failure in A + B vs. A + V users. But A + B users had a lower risk of hemorrhagic stroke.

Adrenoceptors and Hypertension

Hypertension is a very prevalent condition associated with high mortality and morbidity, secondary to changes resulting in blood vessels and resultant end-organ damage. Haemodynamic changes, including an initial rise in cardiac output followed by an increase in total peripheral resistance, denote the early changes associated with borderline or stage 1 hypertension, especially in young men. Increased sodium reabsorption leading to kidney damage is another mechanism proposed as one of the initial triggers for essential hypertension. The underlying pathophysiological mechanisms include catecholamine-induced α1- and ß1-adrenoceptor stimulation, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation leading to endothelial dysfunction which is believed to lead to persistent blood pressure elevation.α1 blockers, α2 agonists, and ß blockers were among the first oral anti-hypertensives. They are no longer first-line therapy after outcome trials did not demonstrate any benefits over and above other agents, despite similar blood pressure reductions. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (or angiotensin receptor blockers), calcium channel blockers, and thiazide-like diuretics are now considered the first line of therapy, although adrenoceptor agents still have a role as second- or third-line therapy. The chapter also highlights hypertension in specific medical conditions such as pregnancy, phaeochromocytoma, hyperthyroidism, portal hypertension, pulmonary arterial hypertension, and ocular hypertension, to provide an overview for clinicians and researchers interested in the role of adrenoceptors in the pathophysiology and management of hypertension.

Advancements in risk stratification and management strategies in primary cardiovascular prevention

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, highlighting the urgent need for advancements in risk assessment and management strategies. Although significant progress has been made recently, identifying and managing apparently healthy individuals at a higher risk of developing atherosclerosis and those with subclinical atherosclerosis still poses significant challenges. Traditional risk assessment tools have limitations in accurately predicting future events and fail to encompass the complexity of the atherosclerosis trajectory. In this review, we describe novel approaches in biomarkers, genetics, advanced imaging techniques, and artificial intelligence that have emerged to address this gap. Moreover, polygenic risk scores and imaging modalities such as coronary artery calcium scoring, and coronary computed tomography angiography offer promising avenues for enhancing primary cardiovascular risk stratification and personalised intervention strategies. On the other hand, interventions aiming against atherosclerosis development or promoting plaque regression have gained attention in primary ASCVD prevention. Therefore, the potential role of drugs like statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, omega-3 fatty acids, antihypertensive agents, as well as glucose-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs are also discussed. Since findings regarding the efficacy of these interventions vary, further research is still required to elucidate their mechanisms of action, optimize treatment regimens, and determine their long-term effects on ASCVD outcomes. In conclusion, advancements in strategies addressing atherosclerosis prevention and plaque regression present promising avenues for enhancing primary ASCVD prevention through personalised approaches tailored to individual risk profiles. Nevertheless, ongoing research efforts are imperative to refine these strategies further and maximise their effectiveness in safeguarding cardiovascular health.

Association between antihypertensive treatment, blood pressure variability, and stroke severity and outcomes in acute ischemic stroke

OBJECTIVES

The management of blood pressure (BP) and the role of antihypertensive medications (AHT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remain uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the impact of pre- and intra-stroke AHT use on systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and blood pressure variability (BPV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A post-hoc analysis was conducted on 228 AIS patients from the PREVISE study. All patients underwent 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring within 48 h of symptom onset. Clinical and laboratory data, as well as AHT details, were recorded. Mean BP parameters and BPV for SBP and DBP were computed. The study endpoint was 3-month mortality.

RESULTS

The majority of stroke patients (84.2%) were already taking AHTs. Beta blockers and ACE inhibitors use before and after stroke were linked to higher DBP variability. Prior angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and vasodilators use correlated with increased SBP variability and lower daytime SBP/DBP levels, respectively. The continuation, discontinuation, or change of AHTs after stroke onset did not significantly affect outcomes. Patients under AHTs during AIS exhibited reduced mortality, with those previously using calcium channel blockers experiencing less severe strokes, and those previously using ARBs showing better outcomes at three months.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings advocate for personalized BP management in AIS, based on a patient's antihypertensive history. These insights could enhance treatment efficacy, guide research, and improve care for acute ischemic stroke patients.

Rationale for the Inclusion of β-Blockers Among Major Antihypertensive Drugs in the 2023 European Society of Hypertension Guidelines

We address the reasons why, unlike other guidelines, in the 2023 guidelines of the European Society of Hypertension β-blockers (BBs) have been regarded as major drugs for the treatment of hypertension, at the same level as diuretics, calcium channel blockers, and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. We argue that BBs, (1) reduce blood pressure (the main factor responsible for treatment-related protection) not less than other drugs, (2) reduce pooled cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in placebo-controlled trials, in which there has also been a sizeable reduction of all major cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes, (3) have been associated with a lower global cardiovascular protection in 2 but not in several other comparison trials, in which the protective effect of BBs versus the other major drugs has been similar or even greater, with a slightly smaller or no difference of global benefit in large trial meta-analyses and a similar protective effect when comparisons extend to BBs in combination versus other drug combinations. We mention the large number of cardiac and other comorbidities for which BBs are elective drugs, and we express criticism against the exclusion of BBs because of their lower protective effect against stroke in comparison trials, because, for still uncertain reasons, differences in protection against cause-specific events (stroke, heart failure, and coronary disease) have been reported for other major drugs. These partial data cannot replace global benefits as the main deciding factor for drug choice, also because in the general hypertensive population whether and which type of event might occur is unknown.

Rationale of treatment recommendations in the 2023 ESH hypertension guidelines

No abstract available.

Comparing Cardiovascular Outcomes and Costs of Perindopril-, Enalapril- or Losartan-Based Antihypertensive Regimens in South Africa: Real-World Medical Claims Database Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Differences in class or molecule-specific effects between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors have not been conclusively demonstrated. This study used South African data to assess clinical and cost outcomes of antihypertensive therapy with the three most common RAAS inhibitors: perindopril, losartan and enalapril.

METHODS

Using a large, South African private health insurance claims database, we identified patients with a hypertension diagnosis in January 2015 receiving standard doses of perindopril, enalapril or losartan, alone or in combination with other agents. From claims over the subsequent 5 years, we calculated the risk-adjusted rate of the composite primary outcome of myocardial infarction, ischaemic heart disease, heart failure or stroke; rate of all-cause mortality; and costs per life per month (PLPM), with adjustments based on demographic characteristics, healthcare plan and comorbidity.

RESULTS

Overall, 32,857 individuals received perindopril, 16,693 losartan and 13,939 enalapril. Perindopril-based regimens were associated with a significantly lower primary outcome rate (205 per 1000 patients over 5 years) versus losartan (221; P < 0.0001) or enalapril (223; P < 0.0001). The risk-adjusted all-cause mortality rate was lower with perindopril than enalapril (100 vs. 139 deaths per 1000 patients over 5 years; P = 0.007), but not losartan (100 vs. 94; P = 0.650). Mean (95% confidence interval) overall risk-adjusted cost PLPM was Rands (ZAR) 1342 (87-8973) for perindopril, ZAR 1466 (104-9365) for losartan (P = 0.0044) and ZAR 1540 (77-10,546) for enalapril (P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSION

In South African individuals with private health insurance, a perindopril-based antihypertensive regimen provided better clinical and cost outcomes compared with other regimens.

Controlled release of MT-1207 using a novel gastroretentive bilayer system comprised of hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymers

In the present study, novel gastroretentive bilayer tablets were developed that are promising for the once-a-day oral delivery of the drug candidate MT-1207. The gastroretentive layer consisted of a combination of hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymers, namely polyethylene oxide and Kollidon® SR. A factorial experiment was conducted, and the results revealed a non-effervescent gastroretentive layer that, unlike most gastroretentive layers reported in the literature, was easy to prepare, and provided immediate tablet buoyancy (mean floating lag time of 1.5 s) that lasted over 24 h in fasted state simulated gastric fluid (FaSSGF) pH 1.6, irrespective of the drug layer, thereby allowing a 24-hour sustained release of MT-1207 from the drug layer of the tablets. Furthermore, during in vitro buoyancy testing of the optimised bilayer tablets in media of different pH values (1.0, 3.0, 6.0), the significant difference (one-way ANOVA, p < 0.001) between the respective total floating times indicated that stomach pH effects on tablet buoyancy are important to be considered during the development of non-effervescent gastroretentive formulations and the choice of dosing regimen. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been reported before, and it should probably be factored in when designing dosing regimens. Finally, a pharmacokinetic study in Beagle dogs indicated a successful in vivo 24-hour sustained release of MT-1207 from the optimised gastroretentive bilayer tablet formulations with the drug plasma concentration remaining above the estimated minimum effective concentration of 1 ng/mL at the 24-hour timepoint and also demonstrated the gastroretentive capabilities of the hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymer combination. The optimised formulations will be forwarded to clinical development.

Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of esaxerenone versus trichlormethiazide in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension: EXCITE-HT study

The next-generation mineralocorticoid receptor blocker (MRB) esaxerenone has favorable antihypertensive effects in patients who do not respond to treatment with first-line antihypertensive agents and may be beneficial as a second-line treatment. However, MRBs are currently considered a fourth-line treatment as there is no clinical evidence comparing the efficacy of esaxerenone with other classes of antihypertensive agents. The multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group EXCITE-HT study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of esaxerenone as a second-line agent in the treatment of Japanese patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. After a 4-week run-in period, patients will receive either esaxerenone or trichlormethiazide for 12 weeks per the package insert and the Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. At Weeks 4 and 8, the dose of esaxerenone or trichlormethiazide may be increased. Blood pressure (home [morning and bedtime] and office), serum biomarkers, and urinary biomarkers will be measured. The primary efficacy endpoint is the change from baseline in morning home systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure to the end of treatment. The EXCITE-HT study is expected to validate the non-inferiority of esaxerenone to trichlormethiazide and provide the first evidence for the early use of esaxerenone as a second-line agent in the treatment of Japanese patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension instead of its current use as a fourth-line agent.

The Combination of Beta-Blockers and ACE Inhibitors Across the Spectrum of Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, affecting a wide range of patients at different stages across the cardiovascular continuum. Hypertension is one of the earliest risk factors in this continuum and can be controlled in most patients with currently available antihypertensive agents. However, goals are often not met because treatments are not optimized in terms of tailoring therapy to individual patients based on their hypertension subclass and cardiovascular risk profile and initiating early use of adapted-dose, single-pill combinations. In this context, beta-blockers in combination with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are of special interest as a result of their complementary actions on the sympathetic nervous system and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, two interlinked pathways that influence cardiovascular risk and disease outcomes. In addition to their antihypertensive actions, beta-blockers are used to manage arrhythmias and treat angina pectoris and heart failure, while ACE inhibitors provide cardioprotection in patients with acute coronary syndromes and treat congestive heart failure. A broad range of patients may therefore receive the combination in routine clinical practice. This paper examines the supporting evidence for beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors in each of the above indications and considers the rationale for combining these agents into a single pill, using data from bisoprolol and perindopril randomized controlled trials as supporting evidence. Combining these established antihypertensive agents into a single pill continues to provide effective blood pressure lowering and improved cardiovascular outcomes while allowing a greater proportion of patients to rapidly achieve treatment targets.

First-line diuretics versus other classes of antihypertensive drugs for hypertension

BACKGROUND

Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity outcomes, and lowering blood pressure. First-line low-dose thiazide diuretics have been previously shown to have the best mortality and morbidity evidence when compared with placebo or no treatment. Head-to-head comparisons of thiazides with other blood pressure-lowering drug classes would demonstrate whether there are important differences.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of first-line diuretic drugs with other individual first-line classes of antihypertensive drugs on mortality, morbidity, and withdrawals due to adverse effects in patients with hypertension. Secondary objectives included assessments of the need for added drugs, drug switching, and blood pressure-lowering.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Hypertension's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers to March 2021. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search of the Specialized Register was carried out in June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized active comparator trials of at least one year's duration were included. Trials had a clearly defined intervention arm of a first-line diuretic (thiazide, thiazide-like, or loop diuretic) compared to another first-line drug class: beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, alpha adrenergic blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, direct renin inhibitors, or other antihypertensive drug classes. Studies had to include clearly defined mortality and morbidity outcomes (serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure, and withdrawals due to adverse effects).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials with 26 comparator arms randomizing over 90,000 participants. The findings are relevant to first-line use of drug classes in older male and female hypertensive patients (aged 50 to 75) with multiple co-morbidities, including type 2 diabetes. First-line thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics were compared with beta-blockers (six trials), calcium channel blockers (eight trials), ACE inhibitors (five trials), and alpha-adrenergic blockers (three trials); other comparators included angiotensin II receptor blockers, aliskiren (a direct renin inhibitor), and clonidine (a centrally acting drug). Only three studies reported data for total serious adverse events: two studies compared diuretics with calcium channel blockers and one with a direct renin inhibitor. Compared to first-line beta-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10; 5 trials, 18,241 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (5.4% versus 4.8%; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6%, moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.09; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), CHD (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.07; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), or heart failure (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.19; 1 trial, 6569 participants; low-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (10.1% versus 7.9%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.85; 5 trials, 18,501 participants; ARR 2.2%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line calcium channel blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 7 trials, 35,417 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.24; 2 trials, 7204 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (14.3% versus 13.3%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty) or CHD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (4.4% versus 3.2%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.2%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (7.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88; 7 trials, 33,908 participants; ARR 1.4%; low-certainty). Compared to first-line ACE inhibitors, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 3 trials, 30,961 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in total cardiovascular events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce stroke slightly (4.7% versus 4.1%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; ARR 0.6%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; moderate-certainty) or heart failure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 2 trials, 30,392 participants; moderate-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (3.9% versus 2.9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.84; 3 trials, 25,254 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line alpha-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (12.1% versus 9.0%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 3.1%; moderate-certainty) and stroke (2.7% versus 2.3%; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 0.4%; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (5.4% versus 2.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.58; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; ARR 2.6%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (1.3% versus 0.9%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 3 trials, 24,772 participants; ARR 0.4%; low-certainty). For the other drug classes, data were insufficient. No antihypertensive drug class demonstrated any clinically important advantages over first-line thiazides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When used as first-line agents for the treatment of hypertension, thiazides and thiazide-like drugs likely do not change total mortality and likely decrease some morbidity outcomes such as cardiovascular events and withdrawals due to adverse effects, when compared to beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and alpha-blockers.

Beta-Blockers and Hypertension: Some Questions and Answers

INTRODUCTION

International guidelines have removed b-blockers from first-line treatment of hypertension, limiting their use to patients with compelling indications. The position of guidelines stems from the results of studies performed with the 1st and 2nd generation of b-blockers, which concluded that these drugs have lower cardiovascular protection, compared with other antihypertensive agents.

AIM

The aim of our mini review is to answer to some questions about the effect of b-blockers on hypertension and cardiovascular protection and if these effects are different from those of other antihypertensive drugs, particularly in young and elderly patients.

METHODS

We evaluated the relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which reported the effectiveness of b-blockers on blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes, compared with placebo/no treatment and with other antihypertensive agents.

RESULTS

Beta-blockers, decreased high blood pressure with no significant difference from other common antihypertensive agents. Moreover b-blockers, compared with placebo, lowered the risk of major cardiovascular outcomes, while, compared with other drug classes, the reported results are very heterogeneous. Therefore it is difficult, globally, to find a difference between b-blockers and other drug classes.

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than looking for differences in the cardiovascular protective effect between b-blockers and other antihypertensive agents, we have to consider the different pathophysiology of hypertension in young [sympathetic hyperactivity] and elderly patients [arterial stiffness, high aortic systolic pressure]. Considering these aspects, non-vasodilating b-blockers are preferred, as first-line, in young/middle aged hypertensive subjects, while vasodilating b-blockers, are most appropriate, in elderly patients, for the favourable hemodynamic profile.

Etiological Diagnosis and Personalized Therapy for Hypertension: A Hypothesis of the REASOH Classification

With the epidemic of risk factors such as unhealthy lifestyle, obesity and mental stress, the prevalence of hypertension continues to rise across the world. Although standardized treatment protocols simplify the selection of antihypertensive drugs and ensure therapeutic efficacy, the pathophysiological state of some patients remains, which may also lead to the development of other cardiovascular diseases. Thus, there is an urgent need to consider the pathogenesis and selection of antihypertensive drug for different type of hypertensive patients in the era of precision medicine. We proposed the REASOH classification, based on the etiology of hypertension, including renin-dependent hypertension, elderly-arteriosclerosis-based hypertension, sympathetic-active hypertension, secondary hypertension, salt-sensitive hypertension and hyperhomocysteinemia hypertension. The aim of this paper is to propose a hypothesis and provide a brief reference for the personalized treatment of hypertensive patients.

[Comprehensive Therapeutic Approach to Hypertension. Recommendations for Central America and the Caribbean]

Latin American hypertension guidelines, tailored to the needs of countries of Central and South America, should be applied and known by most Latin American physicians. The knowledge and implementation of the Guidelines is one of the greatest challenges of hypertension societies in Latin America such as the Central American and Caribbean Society of Arterial Hypertension (SCCH), the Latin American Society of Hypertension (LASH) and the Inter-American Society of Cardiology (SIAC). In 2020, the Inter-American Society of Cardiology (SIAC) published its position on the current Guidelines for Arterial Hypertension due to the need to standardize the evaluation, diagnosis, treatment and control of hypertension, establishing recommendations that should be adopted in all Latin American countries, aimed at optimizing the management of cardiovascular risk and achieving a substantial improvement in the reduction of cardiovascular events and mortality. This document intends to reinforce all proposals by the LASH guidelines and the position of the SIAC in relation to the therapeutic approach and pharmacological recommendations for patients with hypertension (HT), in order to achieve better HT control in the Central American and Caribbean area, and the consequently prognosis improvement of cardiovascular disease in the area.

Anti-atherosclerotic therapies: Milestones, challenges, and emerging innovations

Atherosclerosis is the main underlying pathology for many cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which are the leading cause of death globally and represent a serious health crisis. Atherosclerosis is a chronic condition that can lead to myocardial infarction, ischemic cardiomyopathy, stroke, and peripheral arterial disease. Elevated plasma lipids, hypertension, and high glucose are the major risk factors for developing atherosclerotic plaques. To date, most pharmacological therapies aim to control these risk factors, but they do not target the plaque-causing cells themselves. In patients with acute coronary syndromes, surgical revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention has greatly reduced mortality rates. However, stent thrombosis and neo-atherosclerosis have emerged as major safety concerns of drug eluting stents due to delayed re-endothelialization. This review summarizes the major milestones, strengths, and limitations of current anti-atherosclerotic therapies. It provides an overview of the recent discoveries and emerging game-changing technologies in the fields of nanomedicine, mRNA therapeutics, and gene editing that have the potential to revolutionize CVD clinical practice by steering it toward precision medicine.

[Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2022 thematic updates. Working groups of the PAPPS]

The recommendations of the semFYC's Program for Preventive Activities and Health Promotion (PAPPS) for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are presented. The following sections are included: epidemiological review, where the current morbidity and mortality of CVD in Spain and its evolution as well as the main risk factors are described; cardiovascular (CV) risk and recommendations for the calculation of CV risk; main risk factors such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, describing the method for their diagnosis, therapeutic objectives and recommendations for lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment; indications for antiplatelet therapy, and recommendations for screening of atrial fibrillation, and recommendations for management of chronic conditions. The quality of testing and the strength of the recommendation are included in the main recommendations.

The impact of medical therapy on left ventricular strain: Current state and future perspectives

The speckle tracking strain is becoming a frequently used marker of subclinical left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Despite the wide range of data concerning left ventricular strain variability in the general population and its changes in various pathologic conditions, the information about the impact of medical therapy on left ventricle strain is limited. This article provides an analysis of published studies of left ventricle strain changes in response to different agents and combinations of medical therapies used for hypertension and congestive heart failure.

Over-Prescription of the Imidazoline Receptor Agonists: Evidence for Restriction of the Therapeutic Indication

BACKGROUND

Major antihypertensive drug classes (but not Imidazoline Receptor Agonists) have been demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In 2017, Latvia and Lithuania had the highest cardiovascular mortality among the Eastern, Central, Northern, and Western Member States of the European Union (EU). Cardiovascular mortality in Estonia is much lower than in Lithuania and Latvia.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the consumption of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in the Baltic States and its potential implications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included data on the sales of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia; the marketing authorization databases of the competent authorities; the guidelines on the treatment of hypertension, and the reimbursement conditions.

RESULTS

The study showed a very high consumption of the Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania and Latvia. From 2016 to 2019, the average consumption of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania was 15.5 times higher than in Estonia; in Latvia, it was 8.9 times higher than in Estonia. The guidelines recommend the use of the Imidazoline Receptors Agonists as one of the last options in hypertension therapy, but the marketing authorizations do not restrict their line of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumption of IRAs in Lithuania and Latvia is very high. The authorized use of the IRAs in the EU Member States is not in line with the guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension and therefore patients might be deprived of therapies that reduce the cardiovascular risk. The drug regulatory authorities of the EU should review the data on the safety and efficacy of the IRAs and restrict their therapeutic indications if necessary.

Pharmacological Management of Primary Arterial Hypertension: A Century of Expert Opinions in Cecil Textbook of Medicine

BACKGROUND

Advances in drug therapy for primary (or essential) arterial hypertension have contributed to a significant decrease in the frequency and severity of strokes, coronary artery disease and heart failure, and chronic renal insufficiency.

STUDY QUESTION

What are the milestones of the changes in the expert approach to the pharmacological management of arterial hypertension in the past century?

STUDY DESIGN

To determine the changes in the experts' approach to the management of arterial hypertension, as presented in a widely used textbook in the United States.

DATA SOURCES

The chapters presenting the management of arterial hypertension in the 26 editions of Cecil Textbook of Medicine published from 1927 through 2020.

RESULTS

The pharmacological management of arterial hypertension has had 3 overlapping eras in the timeframe subject to our investigation. In the empiric era (1927-1947), experts were recommending nonspecific interventions for sedation. The premodern era (1955-1963) relied on ganglion blockers, sympathetic blockers, and direct vasodilators. The modern era (1967-2020), which includes drugs used in current clinical practice, saw the introduction of diuretics (1967), beta-blockers (1971), alpha-blockers (1982), calcium channel blockers (1985), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (1985), angiotensin receptor blockers (2000), and direct renin inhibitors (2008).

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacological management of arterial hypertension has been the focus of intense and successful research and development in the second half of the 20th century.

Drug-drug interactions involving antipsychotics and antihypertensives

INTRODUCTION

Antipsychotics represent the mainstay in the treatment of patients diagnosed with major psychiatric disorders. Hypertension, among other components of metabolic syndrome, is a common finding in these patients. For their psychiatric and physical morbidity, many patients receive polypharmacy, exposing them to the risk of clinically relevant drug-drug interactions.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the knowledge regarding the known or potential drug-drug interactions between antipsychotics and the main drug classes used in the treatment of hypertension. We aimed to provide the clinician an insight into the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between these drugs for a better choice of combinations of drugs to treat both the mental illness and cardiovascular risk factors. For this, we performed a literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases, up to 31 July 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

The main pharmacokinetic interactions between antipsychotics and antihypertensive drugs involve mainly the cytochrome P450 system. The pharmacodynamic interactions are produced by multiple mechanisms, leading to concurrent binding to the same receptors. The data available regarding drug-drug interactions is mostly based on case reports and small studies and therefore should be interpreted with caution. The current knowledge is sufficiently strong to guide clinicians in selecting safer drug combinations as summarized here.

[Indicators of rational prescription of medicines: feasibility of application in institutions in the AmericasIndicadores de prescrição racional de medicamentos: viabilidade de aplicação em instituições das Américas]

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the feasibility of monitoring the quality of use of medicines in health institutions in countries of the Region of the Americas by means of rational prescription indicators.

METHODOLOGY

A quantitative study of the use of medicines was conducted during the period 2016-2018. Rational prescription indicators were developed and selected in accordance with international reference values and the best available evidence for: 1) anti-inflammatory drugs: prescription of ibuprofen and/or naproxen as a percentage of all prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; 2) oral antidiabetics: metformin as a percentage of all prescribed antidiabetics, and metformin and/or sulfonylureas as a percentage of all prescribed antidiabetics; 3) insulins: crystalline insulin and NPH as a percentage of total prescribed insulins; and 4) antihypertensive drugs: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs-II), and thiazide diuretics as a percentage of all prescribed antihypertensives. The defined daily dose (DDD) per 1 000 inhabitants was used as a measure of consumption per institution.

RESULTS

Prescription of metformin as a percentage of all antidiabetics was lower than the value of the reference indicator (27.9%-67.6% vs. 88%), while the prescription of metformin and/or a sulfonylurea was comparable with that value (80.9%-97.5% vs. 88%). The values of NPH, crystalline, and NPH/crystalline insulin in relation to all prescribed insulins were variable with respect to the reference indicator (37.1%-100% vs. 75%). Prescription of ibuprofen and naproxen was below the value of the indicator (20%-50% vs. 80%). The percentage of ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and thiazides with respect to all antihypertensives ranged from 65.2%-77.2% to 65%, consistent with the value of the proposed indicator.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility of applying the selected and constructed indicators of rational prescription was demonstrated. These indicators provide useful information for analyzing the quality of prescription in health institutions in countries in the Region and are a useful tool for periodically monitoring it.

A "20/20" Match: ACC/AHA 2017 versus ESC/ESH 2018 Guidelines for Management of Hypertension

Hypertension, the commonest noncommunicable disease globally, is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and renal failure. Theoretically, while it is easy to diagnose and manage by simple measures, practically it has been observed that not only treatment but also diagnosis and its preventive measures are inadequate in developing as well as developed nations. Several guidelines by various international organizations are available to guide clinicians for hypertension management. Though the basic principles of hypertension management are similar in all the guidelines, subtle differences are there. In this article, we compare the two most widely accepted guidelines for hypertension, that is, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association 2017 Hypertension Guidelines and 2018 European Society of Cardiology and European Society of Hypertension Guidelines on Hypertension. Both the differences and similarities between these two widely followed guidelines are presented.

Net clinical benefit of a reduced dose of DOACs in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

In standard dosing, direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) are used as an alternative to warfarin to prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation (AF). However, randomized comprehensive evidence considering the efficacy and safety of the low-dose DOACs in the same setting is still lacking. Toward this end, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to estimate the risk/benefit ratio, in terms of net clinical benefit, by comparing a reduced dose of DOACs and warfarin.

METHODS

We searched three electronic databases, covering the period until end-February 2021. All-cause death, non-fatal stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding events, with or without the inclusion of myocardial infarction, were used to define two different net clinical benefit outcomes. In addition, we evaluated different component outcomes of net clinical benefit as secondary outcomes. Finally, risk ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) of each outcome were calculated (random-effects model).

RESULTS

In the four randomized trials included (n = 29,779 patients), the net clinical benefit - with or without the inclusion of myocardial infarction - of low-dose DOACs, compared to warfarin, was a 12% (95% CI, 7%-16%) or a 10% (95% CI, 5%-13%) reduction of events, respectively. Compared to warfarin, the reduced dose of DOACs decreased death outcomes, major bleeding events, and hemorrhagic stroke, whereas all thrombotic outcomes were not different among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs at low dosing present a more favorable net clinical benefit profile compared to warfarin.

Executive summary of the 2020 clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in the Philippines

Hypertension is the most common cause of death and disability worldwide with its prevalence rising in low to middle income countries. It remains to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the Philippines with poor BP control as one of the main causes. Different societies and groups worked and collaborated together to develop the 2020 Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines of hypertension arising for the need to come up with a comprehensive local practice guideline for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of persons with hypertension. A technical working group was organized into six clusters that analyzed the 30 clinical questions commonly asked in practice, looking into the definition of hypertension, treatment thresholds, blood pressure targets, and appropriate medications to reach targets. This guideline also includes recommendations for the specific management of hypertension among individuals with uncomplicated hypertension, hypertension among those with diabetes, stroke, chronic kidney disease, as well as hypertension among pregnant women and pediatric populations. It also looked into the appropriate screening and monitoring of patients when managing hypertension, and identification of groups who are at high risk for cardiovascular (CV) events. The ADAPTE process was used in developing the statements and recommendations which were then presented to a panel of experts for discussion and approval to come up with the final statements. This guideline aims to aid Filipino healthcare professionals to provide evidence‐based care for persons with hypertension and help those with hypertension adequately control their blood pressure and reduce their CV risk

Concordance of recommendations across clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in Southeast Asia with internationally reputable sources

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the rate of concordance, and to investigate sources of non-concordance of recommendations in the management of hypertension across CPGs in Southeast Asia, with internationally reputable clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).

METHODS

CPGs for the management of hypertension in Southeast Asia were retrieved from the websites of the Ministry of Health or cardiovascular specialty societies of the individual countries of Southeast Asia during November to December 2020. The recommendations for the management of hypertension specified in the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guideline and the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guideline were selected to be the reference standards; the recommendations concerning the management of hypertension in the included CPGs in Southeast Asia were assessed if they were concordant with the reference recommendations generated from both the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline, using the population (P)-intervention (I)-comparison (C) combinations approach.

RESULTS

A total of 59 reference recommendations with unique and unambiguous P-I-C specifications was generated from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. In addition, a total of 51 reference recommendations with unique and unambiguous P-I-C specifications was generated from the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline. Considering the six included CPGs from Southeast Asia, concordance was observed for 30 reference recommendations (50.8%) out of 59 reference recommendations generated from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and for 31 reference recommendations (69.8%) out of 51 reference recommendations derived from the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertension represents a significant issue that places health and economic strains in Southeast Asia and demands guideline-based care, yet CPGs in Southeast Asia have a high rate of non-concordance with internationally reputable CPGs. Concordant recommendations could perhaps be considered a standard of care for hypertension management in the Southeast Asia region.

Individual changes of central blood pressure in response to upright posture: different hemodynamic phenotypes

OBJECTIVES

Most studies about upright regulation of blood pressure have focused on orthostatic hypotension despite the diverse hemodynamic changes induced by orthostatic challenge. We investigated the effect of passive head-up tilt on aortic blood pressure.

METHODS

Noninvasive peripheral and central hemodynamics in 613 volunteers without cardiovascular morbidities or medications were examined using pulse wave analysis, whole-body impedance cardiography and heart rate variability analysis.

RESULTS

In all participants, mean aortic SBP decreased by -4 (-5 to -3) mmHg [mean (95% confidence intervals)] and DBP increased by 6 (5--6) mmHg in response to upright posture. When divided into tertiles according to the supine-to-upright change in aortic SBP, two tertiles presented with a decrease [-15 (-14 to -16) and -4 (-3 to -4) mmHg, respectively] whereas one tertile presented with an increase [+7 (7-- 8) mmHg] in aortic SBP. There were no major differences in demographic characteristics between the tertiles. In regression analysis, the strongest explanatory factors for upright changes in aortic SBP were the supine values of, and upright changes in systemic vascular resistance and cardiac output, and supine aortic SBP.

CONCLUSION

In participants without cardiovascular disease, the changes in central SBP during orthostatic challenge are not uniform. One-third presented with higher upright than supine aortic SBP with underlying differences in the regulation of systemic vascular resistance and cardiac output. These findings emphasize that resting blood pressure measurements give only limited information about the blood pressure status.

New Drugs and Interventional Strategies for the Management of Hypertension

Essential hypertension is an important cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide with significant clinical and economic implications. The field of antihypertensive treatment already numbers numerous agents and classes of drugs. However, patients are still developing uncontrolled hypertension. Hence there is a continuous need for novel agents with good tolerability. Advances in this field are focusing both on pharmacotherapy, with the developments in traditional and non-traditional targets, as well as interventional techniques such as renal denervation and baroreflex activation therapy. It is likely that future strategies may involve a tailored approach to the individual patient, with genetic modulation playing a key role.

Beta-blockers in hypertension: overview and meta-analysis of randomized outcome trials

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses from randomized outcome-based trials have challenged the role of beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension. However, because they often include trials on diseases other than hypertension, the role of these drugs in the choice of the blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment strategies remains unclear.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized trials that compared beta-blockers vs. placebo/no-treatment/less-intense treatment (BP-lowering trials) or beta-blockers vs. other antihypertensive agents in patients with or without hypertension (comparison trials). Among BP-lowering trials and according to baseline comorbidity, we separately considered trials in hypertension, trials without chronic heart failure or acute myocardial infarction, and trials with either chronic heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. Seven fatal and nonfatal outcomes were calculated (random-effects model) for BP-lowering or comparison trials.

RESULTS

A total of 84 BP-lowering or comparison trials (165 850 patients) were eligible. In 67 BP-lowering trials (68 478 patients; mean follow-up 2.5 years; baseline SBP/DBP, 136/82 mmHg), beta blockers were associated with a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events [risk ratio 0.85 and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.78-0.92] and all-cause death (risk ratio 0.81 and 95% CI 0.75-0.86). Restriction of the analysis to five trials recruiting exclusively hypertensive patients (18 724 patients; mean follow-up 5.1 years; baseline SBP/DBP 163/94 mmHg), a -10.5/-7.0 mmHg BP decrease was accompanied by reduction of major cardiovascular events by 22% (95% CI, 6-34). In 24 comparison trials (103 764 patients, 3.92 years of mean follow-up), beta-blockers compared with other agents were less protective for stroke and all-cause death in all trials and in trials conducted exclusively in hypertensive patients (averaged risk ratio increase 20 and 6%, respectively, for both cases).

CONCLUSION

Compared with other antihypertensive agents, beta-blockers appear to be substantially less protective against stroke and overall mortality. However, they exhibit a substantial risk-reducing ability for all events when prescribed to lower BP in patients with modest or more clear BP elevations, and therefore can be used as additional agents in hypertensive patients.

Allisartan ameliorates vascular remodeling through regulation of voltage-gated potassium channels in hypertensive rats

BACKGROUND

The objective of the present study was to determine the effect of allisartan, a new angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist on vascular remodeling through voltage gated potassium channels (Kv7) in hypertensive rats.

METHODS

The study included a total of 47 Sprague Dawley (SD) rats. The animals were randomized to sham operation (n = 14), untreated hypertensive control group (n = 18) and allisartan treatment group (n = 15). Using renal artery stenosis, hypertension was induced in animals. Single dose of allisartan was administered intra-gastrically to animals in the allisartan treatment group and match placebo in the other 2 groups. Wire myography was used to measure the muscle tension in isolated mesenteric arteries from the animals. Real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify the expression of Kv7 channel mRNA subunits.

RESULTS

After 4 weeks of treatment, a significant decrease in mean arterial, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) was observed in allisartan treatment group compared to hypertension control group. The median arterial wall thickness and area/diameter ratio reduced significantly in treatment group compared to untreated hypertension group (P < 0.05). Wire myography demonstrated increased relaxation of mesenteric artery with increase in concentration of ML213. A significant up-regulation in the expression of all Kv7 mRNA subunits was observed in allisartan group compared to untreated hypertension group.

CONCLUSIONS

From the results, allisartan was found to lower BP and preserve vascular remodeling through Kv7 channels.

β-Blockade for Patients with Hypertension, Ischemic Heart Disease or Heart Failure: Where are We Now?

β-blockers are a heterogeneous class of drugs, with varying selectivity/specificity for β₁ vs β₂ receptors, intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA), and vasodilatory properties (through β₂ stimulation, α receptor blockade or nitric oxide release). These drugs are indicated for the management of arterial hypertension, heart failure or ischemic heart disease (IHD; eg angina pectoris or prior myocardial infarction). Most of the benefit of β-blockade in these conditions arises from blockade of the β₁ receptor, and, in practice, the addition of ISA appears to reduce the potential for improved clinical outcomes in people with heart failure or IHD. Aspects of the benefit/risk balance of β-blockers remain controversial, and recent meta-analyses have shed new light on this issue. We have reviewed the current place of cardioselective β-blockade in hypertension, IHD and heart failure, with special reference to the therapeutic profile of a highly selective β₁-adrenoceptor blocker, bisoprolol.

Treated Hypertensive Patients Assessed by Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring. TeleMRPA Study

Fundamento:

Hipertensos tratados avaliados apenas com a medida casual da pressão arterial (PA) podem estar sujeitos a decisões equivocadas.

Objetivos:

Avaliar o comportamento da PA pela medida casual e residencial (MRPA), o comportamento das classes de anti-hipertensivos e as prevalências de hipertensão do avental branco (HABNC) e mascarada não-controladas (HMNC).

Métodos:

Estudo transversal que avaliou pacientes pela plataforma TeleMRPA entre 2017 e 2019. Foram excluídos aqueles sem medicamentos, com 3 ou mais, em uso de espironolactona e alfa-2 agonistas. As variáveis analisadas foram: idade, sexo, índice de massa corporal (IMC), número de medidas válidas da PA, médias da PA sistólica (PAS) e diastólica (PAD) pela medida casual e MRPA, e as classes de anti-hipertensivos. Utilizados os testes t pareado e não pareado e qui-quadrado. Adotado nível de significância de 5%.

Resultados:

Selecionados 22.446 pacientes, dos quais 6.731 preencheram os critérios, sendo 61,3% do sexo feminino, com idade média de 57,8 (±12,6) anos e IMC médio de 29,0 (±5,1) kg/m². Os valores médios de PAS e PAD foram 6,6 mmHg (p<0,001) e 4,4 mmHg (p<0,001) maiores na medida casual que na MRPA. As taxas de controle da PA foram de 57,0% pela medida casual e 61,3% pela MRPA (p<0,001), com prevalência de HABNC e HMNC de 15,4% e 11,1%, respectivamente. O bloqueio do sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona ocorreu em 74,6% das vezes e 54,8% estavam em monoterapia.

Conclusões:

O uso da MRPA deve ser considerado no acompanhamento de hipertensos tratados em virtude das elevadas prevalências de HABNC e HMNC. Os anti-hipertensivos tiveram comportamentos distintos nas medidas domiciliares. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0)

Resting Heart Rate as a Cardiovascular Risk Factor in Hypertensive Patients: An Update

A large body of evidence has shown that resting heart rate (RHR) holds important prognostic information in several clinical conditions. In the majority of the general population studies, a graded association between RHR and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular (CV) disease, ischemic heart disease, and stroke has been observed. These associations appeared even stronger and more consistent in hypertensive patients. Studies performed with 24-hour ambulatory recording have shown that an elevated nighttime heart rate may confer an additional risk on top of office RHR. The mechanisms by which tachycardia alone or in association with sympathetic overactivity induces CV damage are well understood. Fast RHR is a strong predictor of future hypertension, metabolic disturbances, obesity, and diabetes. Several experimental lines of research point to high RHR as a main risk factor for the development of atherosclerosis, large artery stiffness, and CV disease. Elevated RHR is a common feature in patients with hypertension. Thus, there is a large segment of the hypertensive population that would benefit from a treatment able to decrease RHR. Improvement of unhealthy lifestyle should be the first goal in the management of the hypertensive patient with elevated RHR. Most clinical guidelines now recommend the use of combination therapies even in the initial treatment of hypertension. Although no results of clinical trials specifically designed to investigate the effect of RHR lowering in human beings without CV diseases are available, in hypertensive patients with high RHR a combination therapy including a cardiac slowing drug at optimized dose seems a sensible strategy. Tachycardia can be considered both as a marker of sympathetic overactivity and as a risk factor for cardiovascular events. In this sketch, the main cardiovascular and metabolic effects of increased sympathetic tone underlying high heart rate are shown. The link between tachycardia and cardiovascular events can be explained also by the direct hemodynamic action of heart rate on the arteries and the left ventricular (LV) wall.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different antihypertensive drug classes for cardiovascular disease prevention: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines differ in their recommendations on first-line antihypertensive drug classes. No adequately powered randomised controlled trial have assessed all major drug classes against each other, and previous meta-analyses have mainly relied on pairwise meta-analyses for treatment comparisons.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis will be carried out to assess the efficacy and acceptability of all major antihypertensive drug classes. PubMed and CENTRAL were searched on 21 February 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials with at least 1000 person-years of follow-up, assessing any antihypertensive agent against other agents or placebo. All trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be assessed for risk of bias using the second version of Cochrane's risk of bias assessment tool. The study selection process, risk of bias assessment and data extraction are done by two authors in duplicate. Relative risks from individual trials will be combined in pairwise meta-analyses; in the absence of important intransitivity, random-effects network meta-analysis will be performed. The primary outcome for efficacy will be major adverse cardiovascular events, whereas the primary acceptability outcome will be treatment discontinuation for any reason. Additional outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and acute renal failure. The impact of differences within drug classes will be explored through alternative networks, including analysing thiazide-like and thiazide-type diuretics separately.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review will only process aggregated study level data and does not require ethical approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020205482.

Prevention after stroke: A quality assurance study

OBJECTIVES

In 1997, the Copenhagen Stroke Study revealed that stroke was recurrent in 23% of patients admitted with a stroke. Predictors of recurrence were history of transient ischaemic attack, atrial fibrillation, male gender and hypertension. In 2011, the Danish recurrence rate was 25%. With the aim of preventing recurrent stroke, a preventive clinic was established in 2014 at the Department of Neurology, Herlev Hospital. Data from the preventive clinic are analysed in the present study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from visits to the clinic from October 2014 to October 2016 were collected from electronic medical records. Data on subsequent admissions with stroke were collected from October 2014 to the end of 2017. Data were collected and analyzed as a means of quality assurance.

RESULTS

Data from 1083 patients showed that half of the patients were hypertensive at discharge regardless of admission with first ever or recurrent stroke. Nurses at the clinic initiated or intensified antihypertensive medication in 40% of patients. Blood pressure was at target in 64% of patients at last visit to the clinic. Stepwise Cox proportional hazard regression analysis of 1024 patients admitted with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack showed that tobacco smoking (HR 1.80), admission with a recurrent stroke (HR 1.76) and cholesterol-lowering treatment (HR 1.67) were independent predictors of stroke recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

The recurrence rate in Denmark has remained unchanged for two decades. Risk factors for recurrence seem to change over time. Identification and treatment of actual risk factors may be a way to reduce recurrence.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients at high cardiovascular risk with previous myocardial infarction or stroke

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend to start blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs also according to cardiovascular risk including history of cardiovascular events. We hypothesized that in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, both or none of those, the index events predict the next event and have different SBP risk associations to different cardiovascular outcomes.

DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS

In this pooled posthoc, nonprespecified analysis, we assessed outcome data from high-risk patients aged 55 years or older with a history of cardiovascular events or proven cardiovascular disease, randomized to the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial and to Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACE Intolerant Subjects with Cardiovascular Disease Trial investigating telmisartan, ramipril and their combination with a median follow-up of 56 months. Standardized office BP was measured every 6 months. Associations of mean achieved BP on treatment were investigated on MI, stroke and cardiovascular death. We identified patients with previous MI (N = 13 487), stroke (N = 4985), both (N = 1509) or none (N = 10 956) of these index events. Analyses were done by Cox regression, analysis of variance and Chi2-test. 30 937 patients with complete data were enrolled between 1 December 2001 and 31 July 2003, and followed until 31 July 2008. Data of both trials were pooled as the outcomes were similar.

RESULTS

Patients with MI as index event had a higher risk to experience a second MI [hazard ratio 1.42 (confidence interval (CI) 1.20-1.69), P < 0.0001] compared with patients with no events but no increased risk for a stroke as a next event [hazard ratio 0.95 (CI 0.73-1.23), n.s.]. The risk was roughly doubled when they had both, MI and stroke before [hazard ratio 2.07 (CI 1.58-2.71), P < 0.0001]. Patients with a stroke history had a roughly three-fold higher likelihood to experience a second stroke [hazard ratio 2.89 (CI 2.37-3.53) P < 0.0001] but not MI [hazard ratio 1.07 (CI 0.88-1.32), n.s.]. Both types of index events increased roughly three-fold the risk of a second stroke compared with no previous events. The SBP-risk relationship was not meaningfully altered by the event history. After MI and stroke the risk for subsequent events and cardiovascular death was increased over the whole SBP spectrum. A J-shape relationship between BP and outcome was only observed for cardiovascular death.

CONCLUSION

Previous MI and previous stroke are associated with increased risk for the same event in the future, independent of achieved SBP. Thus, secondary prevention may also be chosen according to the event history of patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00153101.

Clinical outcomes between calcium channel blockers and angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertensive patients without established cardiovascular diseases during a 3-year follow-up

Although both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are all suitable for the initiation of antihypertensive treatment, studies investigating efficacy and safety between ARBs and CCBs are limited, and there is no previous study comparing their clinical outcomes during long-term follow-up periods in real world setting. We compared cardiovascular (CV) events between ARBs and CCBs in 464,948 hypertensive adults using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database during a 3-year follow-up. The patients with hypertension without heart failure, ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral artery disease were enrolled. The CV events between only single prescription of CCBs and ARBs were finally compared. The primary endpoint for this study was the first occurrence of a major adverse CV events, defined as the composite of all-cause death, cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. ARB was significantly more administered in male and patients with higher income, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney diseases, and higher Charlson comorbidity index. The primary endpoints occurred in 10,526 patients (5.2%) in the ARB group and in 19,363 patients (7.3%) in the CCB group (p < 0.001) during a 3-year follow-up (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93–0.98). All the components of CV events including all-cause death, cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke occurred more frequently in the CCB group. With multivariable models adjusting age, sex, income, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and Charlson comorbidity index, the primary endpoints less frequently developed in the ARB group than in the CCB group (HR 0.957, 95% CI 0.933–0.983, p < 0.001). After the propensity-score matching, baseline characteristics were similar and still showed significantly better primary endpoints in ARB group than CCB group (5.3% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.001). In this nationwide population-based simple hypertension study, administration of ARBs showed superior protection against CV events than CCBs during a 3-year follow-up. Our results suggest that ARBs could be preferred over CCBs as the initial choice of antihypertensive treatment regardless of age in real-world practice.

Elevated heart rate and cardiovascular risk in hypertension

Epidemiological studies have shown that chronically elevated resting heart rate (HR) is significantly associated with organ damage, morbidity and mortality in a wide range of patients including hypertensive patients. Evidence is also available that an increased HR reflects sympathetic nervous system overdrive which is also known to adversely affect organ structure and function and to increase the risk of unfavourable outcomes in several diseases. The causal relationship between elevated HR, organ damage, and cardiovascular outcomes can thus be explained by its relationship with sympathetic cardiovascular influences although evidence of sympathetically-independent adverse effect of HR increases per se makes it more complex. Interventions that target HR by modulating the sympathetic nervous system have therefore a strong pathophysiological and clinical rationale. As most clinical guidelines now recommend the use of combination therapies in patients with hypertension, it might be desirable to consider as combination components drugs which lower HR, if HR is elevated such as, according to guideliines, when it is above 80 b/min.

Blood Pressure Management in Stroke

Hypertension is a well-established and modifiable risk factor for stroke and other cardiovascular diseases. Notably, stroke is the second leading cause of death worldwide and the second most common cause of disability-adjusted life-years. As such, we provide a viewpoint on blood pressure management in stroke and emphasize blood pressure control or management for first and recurrent stroke prevention, acute stroke treatment, and for prevention of cognitive impairment or dementia.

Synopsis of the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension in the Primary Care Setting

DESCRIPTION

In January 2020, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of hypertension in the primary care setting.

METHODS

The VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included a multidisciplinary panel of practicing clinician stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions in collaboration with the ECRI Institute, which systematically searched and evaluated the literature from 15 December 2013 to 25 March 2019 and developed and rated recommendations by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This synopsis summarizes key features of the guideline in several key areas: the measurement of blood pressure, the definition of hypertension, target treatment goals, and nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment of essential and resistant hypertension.

A comparative analysis of current blood pressure management guidelines in people with and without diabetes

Hypertension is the leading global risk factor for cardiovascular disease and premature death. Recommendations from current guidelines of blood pressure (BP) management differ in many ways; therefore, we did an overview and comparative analysis of major clinical guidelines of BP management in people with and without diabetes, including the definition and classification of hypertension, initiation of antihypertensive drug therapy, BP control targets, and antihypertensive treatment strategies. BP management in patients with diabetes was discussed in great detail using both hypertension and diabetes guidelines. We conclude that high-level evidence from high-quality clinical studies is urgently needed to settle uncertainties on BP management recommendations.

[Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2020 update]

The recommendations of the semFYC's Program for Preventive Activities and Health Promotion (PAPPS) for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are presented. The following sections are included: Epidemiological review, where the current morbidity and mortality of CVD in Spain and its evolution as well as the main risk factors are described; Cardiovascular (CV) risk tables and recommendations for the calculation of CV risk; Main risk factors such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, describing the method for their diagnosis, therapeutic objectives and recommendations for lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment; Indications for antiplatelet therapy, and recommendations for screening of atrial fibrillation. The quality of testing and the strength of the recommendation are included in the main recommendations.