The importance and prognostic value of nocturnal blood pressure assessments using inexpensive domestic devices

Effect of a fixed-dose combination of Telmisartan/S-amlodipine on circadian blood pressure compared with Telmisartan monotherapy: TENUVA-BP study

Background

This study evaluated the circadian efficacy of a telmisartan 40 mg/S-amlodipine 2.5 mg fixed-dose combination (Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5) compared to telmisartan 80 mg (Telmisartan80) in patients with essential hypertension who did not respond to 2–4 weeks’ treatment with telmisartan 40 mg.

Methods

Eligible patients with essential hypertension (clinic mean sitting systolic blood pressure [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg, or ≥ 130 mmHg in those with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease) were randomly assigned to Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 or Telmisartan80 for 8 weeks. All patients underwent ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) at baseline and 8 weeks later. Primary endpoints were changes in mean 24-h SBP and DBP on 24-h ABPM from baseline after 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in daytime, nighttime, and morning SBP and DBP, and clinic MSSBP and MSDBP.

Results

A total of 316 Korean patients were enrolled, 217 patients were randomized to treatment, and 192 patients completed the study. Compared to Telmisartan80, Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 showed significantly better reductions in 24-h mean SBP and DBP after 8 weeks. Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 also significantly reduced secondary endpoints compared to Telmisartan80. Among 15 adverse events (7 [Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5] and 8 [Telmisartan80]), there were five adverse drug reactions; 14 events were mild, and none were identified with significant between-group differences.

Conclusions

Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 was tolerable and more effective than Telmisartan80 in lowering 24-h mean ambulatory BP in patients with essential hypertension not responding adequately to Telmisartan40. Our findings support the fact that the combination of S-amlodipine with telmisartan is more appropriate than increasing the dose of telmisartan monotherapy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02231788. Registered 4 September 2014.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40885-021-00184-0.

Nocturnal blood pressure measured by home devices: evidence and perspective for clinical application

: Studies using ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring have shown that BP during night-time sleep is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular outcomes than daytime ambulatory or conventional office BP. However, night-time ambulatory BP recordings may interfere with sleep quality because of the device cuff inflation and frequency of measurements. Hence, there is an unmet need for obtaining high quality BP values during sleep. In the last two decades, technological development of home BP devices enabled automated BP measurements during night-time. Preliminary data suggest that nocturnal home BP measurements yield similar BP values and show good agreement in detecting nondippers when compared with ambulatory BP monitoring. Thus, nocturnal home BP measurements might be a reliable and practical alternative to ambulatory BP monitoring to evaluate BP during sleep. As the use of home BP devices is widespread, well accepted by users and has relatively low cost, it may prove to be more feasible and widely available for routine clinical assessment of nocturnal BP. At present, however, data on the prognostic relevance of nocturnal BP measured by home devices, the optimal measurement schedule, and other methodological issues are lacking and await further investigation. This article offers a systematic review of the current evidence on nocturnal home BP, highlights the remaining research questions, and provides preliminary recommendations for application of this novel approach in BP management.

Comparison of blood pressure values-self-measured at home, measured at an unattended office, and measured at a conventional attended office

Self-measured blood pressure (BP) at home (HBP) has been commonly used in clinical practice. Although the unattended office BP (UBP), in which a patient is left alone before and during the measurement, has been investigated, the advantages of UBP over HBP or conventionally measured attended office BP obtained using automated devices (CBP) remain unclear. We performed a multicenter clinical study in Japan to compare the UBP, CBP, and HBP among 308 patients with hypertension at 3 clinics (women, 57.8%; mean age 71.8 years; under antihypertensive drug therapy, 96.4%). The patients measured HBP twice in the morning and twice in the evening for 5 days according to the Japanese Society of Hypertension guidelines. Using the Omron HEM-907 cuff-oscillometric device, the UBP and CBP were measured in line with the protocol in the Systolic blood PRessure INtervention Trial (SPRINT) and in accordance with the guidelines, respectively. Correlation coefficients were ≤0.16 for the comparison of UBP versus morning and evening HBP for the systolic measurement, whereas they were approximately 0.5 (P < 0.001) for the diastolic measurement. The difference between UBP minus HBP was small on average but varied among individuals (mean ± SD for UBP minus morning HBP: 0.9 ± 17.8/-4.5 ± 10.5 mmHg; UBP minus evening HBP: 5.7 ± 17.8/-0.1 ± 11.3 mmHg). In contrast, the measurement values of CBP and UBP were highly correlated (r ≥ 0.72), but the difference between CBP minus UBP was 10.4 ± 12.0/4.2 ± 6.5 mmHg. Based on the low correlations and wide range of differences, UBP cannot be used as an alternative to HBP.

Clinical Significance and Therapeutic Implication of Nocturnal Hypertension: Relationship between Nighttime Blood Pressure and Quality of Sleep

Recent global hypertension guidelines recommend an early, strict and 24-hour blood pressure (BP) control for the prevention of target organ damage and cardiovascular events. Out-of-office BP measurement such as ambulatory BP monitoring and home BP monitoring is now widely utilized to rule out white-coat hypertension, to detect masked hypertension, to evaluate the effects of antihypertensive medication, to analyze diurnal BP variation, and to increase drug adherence. Nocturnal hypertension has been neglected in the management of hypertension despite of its clinical significance. Nighttime BP and non-dipping patterns of BP are stronger risk predictors for the future cardiovascular mortality and morbidity than clinic or daytime BP. In addition to ambulatory or home daytime BP and 24-hour mean BP, nocturnal BP should be a new therapeutic target for the optimal treatment of hypertension to improve prognosis in hypertensive patients. This review will provide an overview of epidemiology, characteristics, and pathophysiology of nocturnal hypertension and clinical significance, therapeutic implication and future perspectives of nocturnal hypertension will be discussed.

Diurnal blood pressure changes

The definition of diurnal blood pressure changes varies widely, which can be confusing. Short-term blood pressure variability during a 24-h period and the dipping status of diurnal blood pressure can be captured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, and these metrics are reported to have prognostic significance for cardiovascular complications. Morning blood pressure surge also indicates this risk, but its effect may be limited to populations with specific conditions. Meanwhile, the combined use of conventional office blood pressure and out-of-office blood pressure allows us to identify people with white-coat and masked hypertension. Current home devices can measure nocturnal blood pressure during sleep more conveniently than ambulatory monitoring; however, we should pay attention to blood pressure measurement conditions regardless of whether they are in a home, ambulatory, or office setting. The relatively poor reproducibility of diurnal blood pressure changes, including the nocturnal fall of blood pressure, is another underestimated issue to be addressed. Although information on diurnal blood pressure changes is expected to be used more effectively in the future, we should also keep in mind that blood pressure levels have remained central to the primary and secondary prevention of blood pressure-related cardiovascular diseases in clinical practice.