Sequential nephron blockade versus sequential renin-angiotensin system blockade in resistant hypertension: a prospective, randomized, open blinded endpoint study. J Hypertens. 2012;30:1656-1664. [PMID: 22728905 DOI: 10.1097/hjh.0b013e3283551e98]

Effect of Sequential Nephron Blockade versus Dual Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade Plus Bisoprolol in the Treatment of Resistant Hypertension, a Randomized Controlled Trial (Resistant Hypertension on Treatment - ResHypOT)

Introduction

Hypertension is the most important modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a leading public health concern.

Objectives

The primary aim was to compare sequential nephron blockade (SNB) versus dual renin-angiotensin system blockade (DRASB) plus bisoprolol in patients with resistant hypertension to observe reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) levels after 20 weeks of treatment.

Material and Methods

This trial was an open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group, clinical study with optional drug up-titration. Participants were evaluated during five visits at 28-day intervals.

Results

The mean age was 55.5 years in the SNB and 58.4 years in the DRASB + bisoprolol group (p=NS). Significant office BP reductions were observed in both groups. SNB group, SBP decreased from 174.5±21.0 to 127.0±14.74 mmHg (p<0.0001), and DBP decreased from 105.3±15.5 to 78.11±9.28 mmHg (p<0.0001). DRASB group, SBP decreased from 178.4±21.08 to 134.4 ± 23.25 mmHg (p<0.0001) and DBP decreased from 102.7±11.07 to 77.33±13.75 mmHg (p<0.0001). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) showed also significant SBP and DBP reductions in both groups (p<0.0001).

Conclusion

In patients with RHTN adherent to treatment, SNB and DRASB plus bisoprolol showed excellent therapeutic efficacy, although SNB was associated with earlier SBP reduction.

Washed microbiota transplantation improves patients with metabolic syndrome in South China

BACKGROUND

Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a growing public health problem worldwide. The clinical impact of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) from healthy donors in MS patients is unclear, especially in southern Chinese populations. This study aimed to investigate the effect of washed microbiota transplantation (WMT) in MS patients in southern China.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with different indications receiving 1-3 courses of WMT were retrospectively collected. The changes of BMI, blood glucose, blood lipids, blood pressure and other indicators before and after WMT were compared, such as fasting blood glucose (FBG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c)), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL-c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), etc. At the same time, comprehensive efficacy evaluation and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) grade assessment were performed on MS patients. Finally, 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing was performed on fecal samples of MS patients before and after transplantation.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients were included, including 42 in the MS group and 195 in the non-MS group. For MS patients, WMT significantly improved the comprehensive efficacy of MS in short term 40.48% (p<0.001), medium term 36.00% (p=0.003), and long term 46.15% (p=0.020). Short-term significantly reduced FBG (p=0.023), TG (p=0.030), SBP (p=0.026) and BMI (p=0.031), and increased HDL-c (p=0.036). The medium term had a significant reduction in FBG (p=0.048), TC (p=0.022), LDL-c (p=0.043), non-HDL-c (p=0.024) and BMI (p=0.048). WMT had a significant short term (p=0.029) and medium term (p=0.011) ASCVD downgrading effect in the high-risk group of MS patients. WMT improved gut microbiota in MS patients.

CONCLUSION

WMT had a significant improvement effect on MS patients and a significant downgrade effect on ASCVD risk in the high-risk group of patients with MS. WMT could restore gut microbiota homeostasis in MS patients. Therefore, the regulation of gut microbiota by WMT may provide a new clinical approach for the treatment of MS.

Approach to Resistant Hypertension from Cardiology and Nephrology Standpoints: Tailoring Therapy

Resistant hypertension is commonly encountered in primary care, cardiology, and nephrology clinics. In patients presenting for the evaluation of resistant hypertension, taking a thoughtful approach to excluding pseudoresistant hypertension or a secondary cause of hypertension is important. When a patient is deemed to have true resistant hypertension, following an evidence-based treatment approach while considering patient-specific comorbidities results not only in better blood pressure control but also better patient long-term adherence to lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions. This article details an approach to the diagnosis and treatment of resistant hypertension with special consideration for patients with preexisting renal and/or cardiovascular disease.

Treatment of Resistant Hypertension in Real Clinical Settings

Background. Current guidelines describe in detail the approaches to the management of patients with resistant hypertension, however, in real clinical settings the number of non-rational and ineffective combinations of antihypertensive drugs used remains high.

Aim. To analyze the distribution of different combinations of antihypertensive drugs for the treatment of resistant hypertension and to estimate the proportion of non-rational combinations.

Methods. The retrospective analysis includes 117 outpatients with resistant hypertension. Resistant hypertension was defined as blood pressure that remains above goal despite concurrent use of three antihypertensive agents of different classes. Exclusion criteria was secondary hypertension. We defined rational combination as the standard combination (renin-angiotensin system [RAS] blocker + calcium-channel blocker [CCB] + diuretic) plus one of the group of reserve drugs (mineralocorticoid receptors antagonist [MRA], beta-blocker, alpha-blocker, agonist of imidazoline receptors [AIR]). Non-rational were considered combinations in which reserve drugs were used before the appointment of a triple combination of first-line drugs. Moreover, in a subgroup of non-rational therapy, situations were identified where such a combination was justified.

Results. The proportion of rational combinations was 58.9%, reasonably non-rational - 15.5%, unreasonably non-rational - 25.6%. Unreasonably non-rational combinations are distributed as follows: non-appointment of CCB - 12%, non-appointment of RAS-blockers - 8%, non-appointment of diuretics - 6%, use of RAS-blockers for hyperkalemia - 6%, administration of MRA without non-potassium-sparing diuretics - 5%, double blockade of RAS - 3%, other combinations - 7%. In addition to first-line drugs, beta-blockers (93.2%), loop diuretics (22.2%), AIR (21.4) were the most prescribable, while the proportion of MRA is only 15.4% of the entire sample.

Limitation: some patient's characteristics could be missed in case histories and some of the combinations could be falsely recognized as malpractice since the analysis was conducted retrospectively.

Conclusion. The proportion of the non-rational combinations for the treatment of resistant hypertension is high. Among the drugs of the reserve, the frequent use of beta-blockers and moxonidine and the inadequate administration of spironolactone are noteworthy. The problem of treatment strategy choice remains relevant in real clinical practice.

Contemporary Strategies to Manage High Blood Pressure in Patients with Coexistent Resistant Hypertension and Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Resistant hypertension (RH) represents an advanced subtype of hypertension that is complex to diagnose and treat. Compared with general hypertension, RH increases the risk patients will develop more advanced cardiovascular complications, including heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). As expected, the prevalence of RH has increased since the introduction of lower blood pressure targets included in the recent 2017 American blood pressure guidelines. The array of pharmacotherapies available to treat both hypertension and HFrEF has also expanded within the past decade. However, the efficacy of these cutting-edge pharmacotherapies has not come without a more advanced understanding of the important adjunct role non-pharmacological therapies play in helping with the management of both hypertension and HFrEF. In this review, we provide a summary of the latest pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies that can be used to initiate treatment and optimize long-term blood pressure control in patients with coexistent RH and HFrEF.

Salt-sensitive hypertension in chronic kidney disease: distal tubular mechanisms

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) causes salt-sensitive hypertension that is often resistant to treatment and contributes to the progression of kidney injury and cardiovascular disease. A better understanding of the mechanisms contributing to salt-sensitive hypertension in CKD is essential to improve these outcomes. This review critically explores these mechanisms by focusing on how CKD affects distal nephron Na+ reabsorption. CKD causes glomerulotubular imbalance with reduced proximal Na+ reabsorption and increased distal Na+ delivery and reabsorption. Aldosterone secretion further contributes to distal Na+ reabsorption in CKD and is not only mediated by renin and K+ but also by metabolic acidosis, endothelin-1, and vasopressin. CKD also activates the intrarenal renin-angiotensin system, generating intratubular angiotensin II to promote distal Na+ reabsorption. High dietary Na+ intake in CKD contributes to Na+ retention by aldosterone-independent activation of the mineralocorticoid receptor mediated through Rac1. High dietary Na+ also produces an inflammatory response mediated by T helper 17 cells and cytokines increasing distal Na+ transport. CKD is often accompanied by proteinuria, which contains plasmin capable of activating the epithelial Na+ channel. Thus, CKD causes both local and systemic changes that together promote distal nephron Na+ reabsorption and salt-sensitive hypertension. Future studies should address remaining knowledge gaps, including the relative contribution of each mechanism, the influence of sex, differences between stages and etiologies of CKD, and the clinical relevance of experimentally identified mechanisms. Several pathways offer opportunities for intervention, including with dietary Na+ reduction, distal diuretics, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and K+ or H+ binders.

Clinical efficacy and safety of spironolactone in patients with resistant hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We conducted a meta-analysis to summarize all available evidence from randomized controlled trial studies regarding the clinical efficacy and safety of spironolactone in patients with resistant hypertension (RH) and provided a quantitative assessment.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases through December 8, 2019, was performed. Randomized controlled trials randomized controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria were included to assess the effect of the addition of spironolactone on office blood pressure (BP), 24-hour ambulatory BP or adverse events in RH patients.

RESULTS

Twelve trials, which enrolled a total of 1655 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. In comparison with placebo, spironolactone significantly reduced office BP (office SBP, weighted mean difference [WMD] = -20.14, 95% CI = -31.17 to -9.12, P < .001; office DBP WMD = -5.73, 95% CI = -8.13 to -3.33, P < .001) and 24-hour ambulatory BP (ASBP, WMD = -10.31, 95% CI = -12.86 to -7.76, P < .001; ADBP, WMD = -3.94, 95% CI = -5.50 to -2.37, P < .001). Compared with alternative drugs, spironolactone treatment in RH patients significantly decreased 24-hour ambulatory BP (ASBP, WMD = -6.98, 95% CI = -12.66 to -1.30, P < .05; ADBP, WMD = -3.03, 95% CI = -5.21 to -0.85, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis fully evaluated the antihypertensive effect of spironolactone compared with placebo, alternative drugs, renal nerve denervation and no treatment. Spironolactone can result in a substantial BP reduction in patients with RH at 3 months.

Sequential nephron blockade with combined diuretics improves diastolic function in patients with resistant hypertension

AIMS

Hypertension is a major contributor to cardiac diastolic dysfunction. Different therapeutics strategies have been proposed to control blood pressure (BP), but their independent impact on cardiac function remains undetermined. In patients with resistant hypertension, we compared the changes in cardiac parameters between two strategies based on sequential nephron blockade (NBD) with a combination of diuretics or sequential renin-angiotensin system blockade (RASB).

METHODS AND RESULTS

After a 4-week period where all patients received Irbesartan 300 mg/day + hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day + amlodipine 5 mg/day, 140 resistant hypertension patients (54.8 ± 11.1 years, 76% men, mean duration with hypertension: 13.1 ± 10.5 years, no previous history of heart failure or current symptoms of congestive heart failure) were randomized 1:1 to the NBD regimen or to the RASB regimen at week 0 (W0, baseline). Treatment intensity was increased at week 4, 8, or 10 if home BP was ≥135/85 mmHg, by sequentially adding 25 mg spironolactone, 20-40 mg furosemide, and 5 mg amiloride (NBD group) or 5-10 mg ramipril and 5-10 mg bisoprolol (RASB group). No other antihypertensive drug was allowed during the study. BP, BNP levels, and echocardiographic parameters were assessed at weeks 0 and 12. The baseline characteristics, laboratory parameters, and plasma hormones (BNP, renin, and aldosterone) and cardiac echocardiographic parameters did not significantly differ between the NBD and the RASB groups. Over 12 weeks, BNP levels significantly decreased in NBD but increased in RASB (mean [CI 95%] change in log-transformed BNP levels: -43% [-67%; -23%] vs. +55% [46%; 62%] in NBD vs. RASB, respectively, P < 0.0001). Similarly, the proportion of patients presenting ≥2 echocardiographic criteria of diastolic dysfunction decreased between baseline and W12 from 31% to 3% in NBD but increased from 19% to 32% in RASB (P = 0.0048). As compared with RASB, NBD induced greater decrease in ambulatory systolic BP (P < 0.0001), pulse pressure (P < 0.0001), and systemic vascular resistance (P < 0.005). In multivariable linear regression analyses, NBD treatment was significantly associated with decreased BNP levels (adjusted ß: -46.41 ± 6.99, P < 0.0001) independent of age, gender, renal function, and changes in BPs or heart rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with resistant hypertension, nephron blockade with a combination of diuretics significantly improves cardiac markers of diastolic dysfunction independently of BP lowering.

Hypertension Drug Therapy

Hypertension is still the number one global killer. No matter what causes are, lowering blood pressure can significantly reduce cardiovascular complications, cardiovascular death, and total death. Unfortunately, some hypertensive individuals simply do not know having hypertension. Some knew it but either not being treated or treated but blood pressure does not achieve goal. The reasons for inadequate control of blood pressure are many. One important reason is that we are not very familiar with antihypertensive agents and less attention has been paid to comorbidities, complications as well as the hypertension-modified target organ damage in patients with hypertension. The right antihypertensive drug was not given to the right hypertensive patients at right time. This reviewer studied comprehensively the literature, hopefully that the review will help improve antihypertensive drug selection and antihypertensive therapy.

Uncontrolled Arterial Hypertension: Kidney, Neurohormonal Imbalance, and Approaches to Antihypertensive Drug Therapy

Resistant and refractory arterial hypertensions are two distinct clinical phenotypes of uncontrolled arterial hypertension (AH), which differ in their sensitivity to antihypertensive drug therapy. The review presents data obtained in clinical studies devoted to elucidating the involvement of disorders of neurohormonal status and renal function in the formation of resistant and refractory arterial hypertension, to and the development of new approaches to increasing the effectiveness of antihypertensive therapy in these patient’s populations. The results of these studies have shown that in patients with uncontrolled arterial hypertension, despite prolonged intake ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs with different mechanisms of action, including a diuretic, excess sodium reabsorption persists in the distal segments of nephron due to increased aldosterone activity and sympathetic nervous system hyperactivity. In this regard, special attention has been paid to the data of PATHWAY-2, PATHWAY-3 and ReHOT trials that in patients with resistant AH tested the clinical efficacy of spironolactone, amiloride, and antiadrenergic drugs bisoprolol, doxazosin and clonidine, suppressing activity of the sympathetic nervous system.

Extracellular Fluid Volume Is an Independent Determinant of Uncontrolled and Resistant Hypertension in Chronic Kidney Disease: A NephroTest Cohort Study

Background

Hypertension is highly prevalent during chronic kidney disease (CKD) and, in turn, worsens CKD prognosis. We aimed to describe the determinants of uncontrolled and resistant hypertension during CKD.

Methods and Results

We analyzed baseline data from patients with CKD stage 1 to 5 (NephroTest cohort) who underwent thorough renal explorations, including measurements of glomerular filtration rate (clearance of ⁵¹Cr‐EDTA) and of extracellular water (volume of distribution of the tracer). Hypertension was defined as blood pressure (BP; average of 3 office measurements) ≥140/90 mm Hg or the use of antihypertensive drugs. In 2015 patients (mean age, 58.7±15.3 years; 67% men; mean glomerular filtration rate, 42±15 mL/min per 1.73 m²), prevalence of hypertension was 88%. Among hypertensive patients, 44% and 32% had uncontrolled (≥140/90 mm Hg) and resistant (uncontrolled BP despite 3 drugs, including a diuretic, or ≥4 drugs, including a diuretic, regardless of BP level) hypertension, respectively. In multivariable analysis, extracellular water, older age, higher albuminuria, diabetic nephropathy, and the absence of aldosterone blockers were independently associated with uncontrolled BP. Extracellular water, older age, lower glomerular filtration rate, higher albuminuria and body mass index, male sex, African origin, diabetes mellitus, and diabetic and glomerular nephropathies were associated with resistant hypertension.

Conclusions

In this large population of patients with CKD, a lower glomerular filtration rate, a higher body mass index, diabetic status, and African origin were associated with hypertension severity but not with BP control. Higher extracellular water, older age, and higher albuminuria were independent determinants of both resistant and uncontrolled hypertension during CKD. Our results advocate for the large use of diuretics in this population.

Resistant Hypertension: Novel Insights

Hypertension is the most common chronic disease and the leading risk factor for disability and premature deaths in the world, accounting for more than 9 million deaths annually. Resistant hypertension is a particularly severe form of hypertension. It was described 50 years ago and since then has been a very active field of research. This review aims at summarizing the most recent findings on resistant hypertension. The recent concepts of apparent- and true-resistant hypertension have stimulated a more precise definition of resistant hypertension taking into account not only the accuracy of blood pressure measurement and pharmacological class of prescribed drugs but also patient adherence to drugs and life-style recommendations. Recent epidemiological studies have reported a 10% prevalence of resistant hypertension among hypertensive subjects and demonstrated the high cardiovascular risk of these patients. In addition, these studies identified subgroups of patients with even higher morbidity and mortality risk, probably requiring a more aggressive medical management. In the meantime, guidelines provided more standardized clinical work-up to identify potentially reversible causes for resistant hypertension such as secondary hypertension. The debate is however still ongoing on which would be the optimal method(s) to screen for non-adherence to hypertension therapy, recognized as the major cause for (pseudo)-resistance to treatment. Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the strong benefit of anti-aldosterone drugs (mostly spironolocatone) as fourth-line therapies in resistant hypertension whereas clinical trials with device-based therapies displayed contrasting results. New trials with improved devices and more carefully selected patients with resistant hypertension are ongoing.

Resistant Hypertension: Questions and Contemporary Answers

The review presents the important problem of resistant hypertension. Its real prevalence is unknown. According to population studies and metaanalyzes of clinical studies, the prevalence of this most severe form of hypertension reaches 12-15% in the general population and 15-18% in clinical cohorts. Over the past decades, an increase in its frequency among patients with hypertension has been noted. Based on the results of large-scale studies, risk factors are detected that allow to assess the risk for the resistance to antihypertensive drugs. Adherence to ongoing antihypertensive therapy is crucial to addressing the issue of hypertension resistance; there are acceptable ways to evaluate it in clinical practice. The review discusses the most common mistakes in the choice of therapy, which can cause resistance to antihypertensive treatment, namely irrational drug combinations, insufficient dosage of the drug, and the use of non-prolonged forms of drugs. The latest recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, including its resistant form, are analyzed. The review contains a rationale based on the results of randomized clinical trials, the choice antihypertensive strategy in this variant of arterial hypertension. The importance of fixed combination antihypertensive drugs, as well as thiazine-like diuretics and amlodipine is stressed. The results of studies demonstrate the rational for the use of antimineralcorticoid drugs, namely spironolactone, for this category of patients. The authors offer an updated algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of resistant hypertension, based on the sections of the latest clinical recommendations on this problem.

[Spironolactone in resistant essential hypertension]

Resistant hypertension is defined as uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) despite three antihypertensive agents including a diuretic (thiazide diuretic if renal function is normal or loop diuretic in case of chronic kidney disease with eGFR<30mL/min), a renin-angiotensin system blocker (ARB or ACEI) and a calcium channel blocker, at optimal doses. Resistance must be confirmed by out-of-office measurements (ambulatory blood pressure monitoring or home blood pressure monitoring) and patients should be asked about treatment compliance and excessive salt or alcohol intake. If the diagnosis of resistant hypertension is confirmed, the patient should be referred to a hypertension specialist to screen for secondary causes of hypertension as they are frequent in this context. If essential resistant hypertension is confirmed, the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, spironolactone, should be added (25 to 50mg daily). In the event of a contraindication to spironolactone, or if adverse effects occur, a beta-blocker, an alpha-blocker, or a centrally acting antihypertensive drug should be prescribed.

2018 Korean Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of hypertension: part II-diagnosis and treatment of hypertension

The standardized techniques of blood pressure (BP) measurement in the clinic are emphasized and it is recommended to replace the mercury sphygmomanometer by a non-mercury sphygmomanometer. Out-of-office BP measurement using home BP monitoring (HBPM) or ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and even automated office BP (AOBP) are recommended to correctly measure the patient’s genuine BP. Hypertension (HTN) treatment should be individualized based on cardiovascular (CV) risk and the level of BP. Based on the recent clinical study data proving benefits of intensive BP lowering in the high risk patients, the revised guideline recommends the more intensive BP lowering in high risk patients including the elderly population. Lifestyle modifications, mostly low salt diet and weight reduction, are strongly recommended in the population with elevated BP and prehypertension and all hypertensive patients. In patients with BP higher than 160/100 mmHg or more than 20/10 mmHg above the target BP, two drugs can be prescribed in combination to maximize the antihypertensive effect and to achieve rapid BP control. Especially, single pill combination drugs have multiple benefits, including maximizing reduction of BP, minimizing adverse effects, increasing adherence, and preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD) and target organ damage.

Resistance to Insulin in Patients with Gitelman Syndrome and a Subtle Intermediate Phenotype in Heterozygous Carriers: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Gitelman syndrome is a salt-losing tubulopathy caused by mutations in the SLC12A3 gene, which encodes the thiazide-sensitive sodium-chloride cotransporter. Previous studies suggested an intermediate phenotype for heterozygous carriers.

METHODS

To evaluate the phenotype of heterozygous carriers of pathogenic SLC12A3 mutations, we performed a cross-sectional study of patients with Gitelman syndrome, heterozygous carriers, and healthy noncarriers. Participants measured their BP at home for three consecutive days before hospital admission for blood and urine sampling and an oral glucose tolerance test.

RESULTS

We enrolled 242 participants, aged 18-75 years, including 81 heterozygous carriers, 82 healthy noncarriers, and 79 patients with Gitelman syndrome. The three groups had similar age, sex ratio, and body mass index. Compared with healthy noncarriers, heterozygous carriers showed significantly higher serum calcium concentration (P=0.01) and a trend for higher plasma aldosterone (P=0.06), but measures of home BP, plasma and urine electrolytes, renin, parathyroid hormone, vitamin D, and response to oral glucose tolerance testing were similar. Patients with Gitelman syndrome had lower systolic BP and higher heart rate than noncarriers and heterozygote carriers; they also had significantly higher fasting serum glucose concentration, higher levels of markers of insulin resistance, and a three-fold higher sensitivity to overweight. According to oral glucose tolerance testing, approximately 14% of patients with Gitelman syndrome were prediabetic, compared with 5% of heterozygous carriers and 4% of healthy noncarriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterozygous carriers had a weak intermediate phenotype, between that of healthy noncarriers and patients with Gitelman syndrome. Moreover, the latter are at risk for development of type 2 diabetes, indicating the heightened importance of body weight control in these patients.

New treatments for hyperkalaemia: clinical use in cardiology

Hyperkalaemia causes significant burden, and even mild hyperkalaemia has been independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Patients with chronic disease states, such as heart failure, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and diabetes mellitus, are increasingly susceptible to the development of hyperkalaemia. Options for management of hyperkalaemia had mainly been limited to short-term, temporizing methods with focus on rapid achievement of normokalaemia. Until recently, there was a lack of safe, efficacious and well-tolerated therapies for long-term management. Two novel potassium binders, patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate, have recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the management of hyperkalaemia. This review discusses these potassium binders with focus largely on the clinical implications of these agents in patients with chronic cardiovascular conditions.

[European guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension 2018-what has changed?]

BACKGROUND

In November 2017, the latest American guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension were published. With these guidelines lowering the threshold for hypertension to 130/80 mm Hg, the latest European guidelines were expected with excitement.

OBJECTIVES

This article gives an overview on the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Hypertension (ESH) 2018 guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension, thereby identifying the most relevant changes in comparison to previous guidelines.

CURRENT DATA

The latest 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines adhere to the previous definition of hypertension, in which a blood pressure of 140/90 mm Hg is considered as threshold for diagnosis. In contrast, there was a change in blood pressure treatment target from below 140/90 to between 120-129/70-79 mm Hg in patients < 65 years if well tolerated. Among patients ≥ 65 years, a systolic blood pressure between 130 and 139 mm Hg is recommended, whereas a diastolic blood pressure between 70 and 79 mm Hg should be targeted. Additionally the guidelines recommend the use of fixed dose combinations as first choice instead of monotherapy to improve adherence. Interventional treatment strategies should only be applied in carefully selected patients at experienced centers and are not recommended outside of clinical studies and registers. Furthermore, the chapters regarding initiation of blood pressure-lowering therapy and clinical evaluation as well as management of hypertension emergencies have been outlined.

CONCLUSIONS

The latest European guidelines for the management of hypertension include several changes. One of the most important aspects is that-in contrast to the American guidelines-the threshold for diagnosis remains at 140/90 mm Hg, whereas treatment target range has been lowered by roughly 10 mm Hg and single pill fixed dose combinations are recommended.

Amiloride resolves resistant edema and hypertension in a patient with nephrotic syndrome; a case report

Sodium and fluid retention is a hallmark and a therapeutic challenge of the nephrotic syndrome (NS). Studies support the "overfill" theory of NS with pathophysiological proteolytic activation of the epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) which explains the common observation of suppressed renin -angiotensin system and poor therapeutic response to ACE inhibitors. Blockade of ENaC by the diuretic amiloride would be a rational intervention compared to the traditionally used loop diuretics. We describe a 38-year-old male patient with type1 diabetes who developed severe hypertension (200/140 mmHg), progressive edema (of at least 10 L), and overt proteinuria (18.5 g/24 h), despite combined administration of five antihypertensive drugs. Addition of amiloride (5 mg/day) to treatment resulted in resolution of edema, weight loss of 7 kg, reduction in blood pressure (150/100-125/81 mmHg), increased 24 h urinary sodium excretion (127-165 mmol/day), decreased eGFR (41-29 mL/min), and increased plasma potassium concentration (4.6-7.8 mmol/L). Blocking of ENaC mobilizes nephrotic edema and lowers blood pressure in NS. However, acute kidney injury and dangerous hyperkalemia is a potential risk if amiloride is added to multiple other antihypertensive medications as ACEi and spironolactone. The findings support that ENaC is active in NS and is a relevant target in adult NS patients.

Blood Pressure and Renal Responses to Orthostatic Stress Before and After Radiofrequency Renal Denervation in Patients with Resistant Hypertension

Background/Aims

In patients with resistant hypertension, renal denervation (RDN) studies have mainly focused their outcomes on blood pressure (BP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term effect of RDN on neurohormonal profiles, renal hemodynamics and sodium excretion in a resting state and during stress induced by lower body negative pressure (LBNP).

Materials and methods

This was a single center prospective observational study. Norepinephrine, plasma renin activity (PRA), glomerular filtration rate (GFR), renal plasma flow (RPF) and sodium excretion were measured in unstimulated conditions (rest) and after one hour of LBNP at three different time points: before (M0), one (M1) and twelve months (M12) after RDN.

Results

Thirteen patients with resistant hypertension were included. In the resting state, no differences were observed in norepinephrine, PRA, sodium excretion and mean BP levels after RDN. GFR (78 ± 32 ml/min at M0 vs 66 ± 26 ml/min at M12 (p = 0.012) and filtration fraction (22.6 ±5.4% at M0 vs 15.1 ±5.3% at M12 (p = 0.002)) both decreased after RDN. During LBNP, the magnitude of the mean BP increase was reduced from +6.8 ± 6.6 mm Hg at M0 to +2.3 ± 1.3 mm Hg at M12 (p = 0.005). The LBNP-induced increase in norepinephrine and decrease in GFR and sodium excretion observed before RDN were blunted after the procedure.

Conclusion

A decrease in GFR and filtration fraction was observed one year after RDN. In addition, our results suggest that RDN blunts not only the norepinephrine but also the mean BP, the GFR and the sodium excretion responses to an orthostatic stress one year after the intervention.

Registry number

NCT01734096

Cardiovascular morbidity of severe resistant hypertension among treated uncontrolled hypertensives: a 4-year follow-up study

Data regarding the prognosis of resistant hypertension (RHTN) with respect to its severity is limited. We investigated the cardiovascular risk of severe RHTN in a prospective observational study. A cohort of 1700 hypertensive patient with treated uncontrolled HTN was followed for a mean period of 3.6 ± 1.8 years. At baseline, standard clinical and laboratory workup was performed, including testing for secondary causes of RHT where applicable. Three groups were identified depending on presence of RHTN (office-based uncontrolled HTN under at least three drugs including a diuretic) and levels of office systolic blood pressure (BP): 1187 patients (70%) without RHTN, 313 (18%) with not-severe RHTN (systolic BP < 160 mmHg) and 200 (12%) with severe RHTN (systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg). Endpoint of interest was cardiovascular morbidity set as the composite of coronary heart disease and stroke. During follow-up, incidence rates of cardiovascular events per 1000 person-years were 7.1 cases in the non-RHTN group, 12.4 cases in the not-severe RHTN group and 18 cases in the severe RHTN group. Unadjusted analysis showed that compared to uncontrolled patients without RHTN, patients with not-severe RHTN exhibited a similar risk but patients with severe RHTN had a significantly higher risk, by 2.5 times (CI: 1.28-4.73, p = 0.007). Even after multivariate adjustment for established risk factors including BP levels and isolated systolic HTN, severe RHTN remained as an independent predictor of the cardiovascular outcome (OR: 2.30, CI: 1.00-5.29, p = 0.05). In conclusion, among treated yet uncontrolled hypertensive patients, severe RHTN exhibits a significantly higher cardiovascular risk indicating the need for prompt management.

Resistant hypertension: Renal denervation or intensified medical treatment?

Resistant hypertension (RH) can be diagnosed if blood pressure (BP) is not controlled with the combination of three antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic, all at effective doses. Patients affected by this condition exhibit a marked increase in the risk of cardiovascular and renal morbid and fatal events. They also exhibit an increased activity of the sympathetic nervous system which is likely to importantly contribute at the renal and other vascular levels to the hypertensive state. Almost 10years ago renal denervation (RDN) by radiofrequency thermal energy delivery to the walls of the renal arteries was proposed for the treatment of RH. Several uncontrolled studies initially reported that this procedure substantially reduced the elevated BP values but this conclusion has not been supported by a recent randomized control trial, which has almost marginalized this therapeutic approach. A revival, however, is under way because of recent positive findings and technical improvement that hold promise to make renal denervation more complete. The antihypertensive efficacy and overall validity of RDN will have to be tested against drug treatment of RH. Several studies indicate that an excess of aldosterone production contributes to RH and recent evidence documents indisputably that anti-aldosterone agents such as spironolactone can effectively control BP in many RH patients, although with some side effects that require close patients' monitoring. At present, it is advisable to treat RH with the addition of an anti-aldosterone agent. If BP control is not achieved or serious side effects become manifest RDN may then be considered.

Acute genetic ablation of pendrin lowers blood pressure in mice

Background

Pendrin, the chloride/bicarbonate exchanger of β-intercalated cells of the renal connecting tubule and the collecting duct, plays a key role in NaCl reabsorption by the distal nephron. Therefore, pendrin may be important for the control of extracellular fluid volume and blood pressure.

Methods

Here, we have used a genetic mouse model in which the expression of pendrin can be switched-on in vivo by the administration of doxycycline. Pendrin can also be rapidly removed when doxycycline administration is discontinued. Therefore, our genetic strategy allows us to test selectively the acute effects of loss of pendrin function.

Results

We show that acute loss of pendrin leads to a significant decrease of blood pressure. In addition, acute ablation of pendrin did not alter significantly the acid-base status or blood K +  concentration.

Conclusion

By using a transgenic mouse model, avoiding off-target effects related to pharmacological compounds, this study suggests that pendrin could be a novel target to treat hypertension.

Hypertension

Systemic arterial hypertension is the most important modifiable risk factor for all-cause morbidity and mortality worldwide and is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Fewer than half of those with hypertension are aware of their condition, and many others are aware but not treated or inadequately treated, although successful treatment of hypertension reduces the global burden of disease and mortality. The aetiology of hypertension involves the complex interplay of environmental and pathophysiological factors that affect multiple systems, as well as genetic predisposition. The evaluation of patients with hypertension includes accurate standardized blood pressure (BP) measurement, assessment of the patients' predicted risk of atherosclerotic CVD and evidence of target-organ damage, and detection of secondary causes of hypertension and presence of comorbidities (such as CVD and kidney disease). Lifestyle changes, including dietary modifications and increased physical activity, are effective in lowering BP and preventing hypertension and its CVD sequelae. Pharmacological therapy is very effective in lowering BP and in preventing CVD outcomes in most patients; first-line antihypertensive medications include angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers and thiazide diuretics.

Spironolactone Versus Clonidine as a Fourth-Drug Therapy for Resistant Hypertension: The ReHOT Randomized Study (Resistant Hypertension Optimal Treatment)

The aim of this study is to compare spironolactone versus clonidine as the fourth drug in patients with resistant hypertension in a multicenter, randomized trial. Medical therapy adherence was checked by pill counting. Patients with resistant hypertension (no office and ambulatory blood pressure [BP] monitoring control, despite treatment with 3 drugs, including a diuretic, for 12 weeks) were randomized to an additional 12-week treatment with spironolactone (12.5-50 mg QD) or clonidine (0.1-0.3 mg BID). The primary end point was BP control during office (<140/90 mm Hg) and 24-h ambulatory (<130/80 mm Hg) BP monitoring. Secondary end points included BP control from each method and absolute BP reduction. From 1597 patients recruited, 11.7% (187 patients) fulfilled the resistant hypertension criteria. Compared with the spironolactone group (n=95), the clonidine group (n=92) presented similar rates of achieving the primary end point (20.5% versus 20.8%, respectively; relative risk, 1.01 [0.55-1.88]; P=1.00). Secondary end point analysis showed similar office BP (33.3% versus 29.3%) and ambulatory BP monitoring (44% versus 46.2%) control for spironolactone and clonidine, respectively. However, spironolactone promoted greater decrease in 24-h systolic and diastolic BP and diastolic daytime ambulatory BP than clonidine. Per-protocol analysis (limited to patients with ≥80% adherence to spironolactone/clonidine treatment) showed similar results regarding the primary end point. In conclusion, clonidine was not superior to spironolactone in true resistant hypertensive patients, but the overall BP control was low (≈21%). Considering easier posology and greater decrease in secondary end points, spironolactone is preferable for the fourth-drug therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01643434.

Resistant Hypertension On Treatment (ResHypOT): sequential nephron blockade compared to dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system plus bisoprolol in the treatment of resistant arterial hypertension - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Resistant hypertension is characterized when the blood pressure (BP) remains above the recommended goal after taking three antihypertensive drugs with synergistic actions at their maximum recommended tolerated doses, preferably including a diuretic. Identifying the contribution of intravascular volume and serum renin in maintaining BP levels could help tailor more effective hypertension treatment, whether acting on the control of intravascular volume or sodium balance, or acting on the effects of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) on the kidney.

Methods/design

This is a randomized, open-label, clinical trial is designed to compare sequential nephron blockade and its contribution to the intravascular volume component with dual blockade of the RAAS plus bisoprolol and the importance of serum renin in maintaining BP levels. The trial has two arms: sequential nephron blockade versus dual blockade of the RAAS (with an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor plus a beta-blocker) both added-on to a thiazide diuretic, a calcium-channel blocker and an angiotensin receptor-1 blocker (ARB). Sequential nephron blockade consists in a progressive increase in sodium depletion using a thiazide diuretic, an aldosterone-receptor blocker, furosemide and, finally, amiloride.

On the other hand, the dual blockade of the RAAS consists of the progressive addition of an ACE inhibitor until the maximum dose and then the administration of a beta-blocker until the maximum dose. The primary outcomes will be reductions in the systolic BP, diastolic BP, mean BP and pulse pressure (PP) after 20 weeks of treatment. The secondary outcomes will evaluate treatment safety and tolerability, biochemical changes, evaluation of renal function and recognition of hypotension (ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM)). The sample size was calculated assuming an alpha error of 5% to reject the null hypothesis with a statistical power of 80% giving a total of 40 individuals per group.

Discussion

In recent years, the cost of resistant hypertension (RH) treatment has increased. Thus, identifying the contribution of intravascular volume and serum renin in maintaining BP levels could help tailor more effective hypertension treatment, whether by acting on the control of intravascular volume or sodium balance, or by acting on the effects of the RAAS on the kidney.

Trial registration

Sequential Nephron Blockade vs. Dual Blockade Renin-angiotensin System + Bisoprolol in Resistant Arterial Hypertension (ResHypOT). ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02832973. Registered on 14 July 2016. First received: 12 June 2016. Last updated: 18 July 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2343-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Resistant Hypertension: Mechanisms and Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Emerging evidence suggests that multiple mechanisms may be responsible for the development of treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH). This review aims to summarize recent data on potential mechanisms of resistance and discuss current pharmacotherapeutic options available in the management of TRH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Excess sodium and fluid retention, increased activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and heightened activity of the sympathetic nervous system appear to play an important role in development of TRH. Emerging evidence also suggests a role for arterial stiffness and, potentially, gut dysbiosis. Therapeutic approaches for TRH should include diuretic optimization and the addition of aldosterone antagonists as the preferred fourth agent in most patients. Further therapeutic approaches may be guided by the suspected underlying mechanism of TRH in conjunction with other patient-specific factors. The pathophysiology of TRH is multifaceted; however, increasing evidence supports several mechanisms that may be targeted to improve blood pressure control among patients with TRH. Further studies are needed to determine whether such approaches may be more effective than usual care.

Copeptin is increased in resistant hypertension

OBJECTIVES

The participation of vasopressin in the mechanisms of resistant hypertension is unclear. We compared plasma copeptin concentration, a surrogate marker for vasopressin secretion, between patients with resistant hypertension and those with controlled blood pressure (CBP), in a post hoc analysis of the Prise en charge de l'Hypertension Artérielle RESistante au traitement trial.

METHODS

After 4-week treatment with irbesartan 300 mg/day, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day, and amlodipine 5 mg/day (baseline), 166 patients were classified as having resistant hypertension (n = 140) or CBP (n = 26) by ambulatory BP monitoring. Patients with resistant hypertension were then randomized for 12 weeks of sequential nephron blockade (n = 74) or sequential renin-angiotensin system blockade (n = 66). Plasma copeptin concentration was measured at baseline and week 12 by immunoassay.

RESULTS

Baseline plasma copeptin concentration was positively associated with male sex, plasma osmolality, BP, and negatively with glomerular filtration rate. It was higher in the resistant hypertension than in the CBP group [geometric mean 5.7 (confidence interval 95% 5.1-6.4) vs. 2.9 (2.3-3.9) fmol/ml, adjusted P < 0.0001). The relationship between plasma copeptin concentration and urinary osmolality was similar in the two groups. At 12 weeks, plasma copeptin concentration in patients whose BP was controlled by sequential nephron blockade or sequential renin-angiotensin system blockade [6.8 (5.6-8.2) and 4.3 (3.0-5.9) fmol/ml, respectively) remained significantly higher than in patients with CBP at baseline (P < 0.0001 vs. both).

CONCLUSION

In patients with resistant hypertension, plasma copeptin concentrations were approximately two-fold higher than those of patients with CBP, after adjustment for plasma osmolality. This difference was not accounted for by renal resistance to vasopressin, suggesting a primary reset of osmostat.

Significant natriuretic and antihypertensive action of the epithelial sodium channel blocker amiloride in diabetic patients with and without nephropathy

OBJECTIVE

Diabetic nephropathy is associated with aberrant glomerular filtration of serine proteases. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that the epithelial sodium channel is activated proteolytically by urine plasmin in diabetic nephropathy and mediates renal sodium retention.

METHODS

In an open-label intervention study on type 1 diabetes patients on standardized NaCl intake (200 mmol/day) with (n = 15) and without diabetic nephropathy (control, n = 12), urinary Na excretion in response to oral amiloride (20 or 40 mg/day for 2 days) was compared.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients completed the study and nine diabetic nephropathy and eight control study participants were compliant (24-h urine Na excretion of 200 mmol ± 30%). Amiloride increased significantly total and fractional Na excretion in both groups. Total natriuresis and weight loss were significantly larger in the control group compared with diabetic nephropathy at day 1 of amiloride, whereas fractional Na excretion did not differ. Amiloride intervention increased plasma renin concentration only in diabetic nephropathy group; it reduced SBP in both groups, whereas DBP was reduced in diabetic nephropathy group only. Albuminuria was reduced significantly by amiloride in diabetic nephropathy group. Urine total amiloride concentration was not different between groups (12 ± 1 and 16 ± 1 μmol/l, respectively). Urine total plasminogen and active plasmin were reduced after amiloride in diabetic nephropathy.

CONCLUSION

Amiloride increased renal Na excretion, reduced blood pressure, albuminuria, and total and active plasmin in urine. It is concluded that epithelial sodium channel is an attractive target to attain blood pressure control in long-term type I diabetes with no enhanced activity associated with nephropathy.

A Network Meta-Analysis of Clinical Management Strategies for Treatment-Resistant Hypertension: Making Optimal Use of the Evidence

BACKGROUND

With the addition of surgical interventions to current medicinal treatments, it is increasingly challenging for clinicians to rationally choose among the various options for treating patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (ATRHTN). This study aims to establish the comparative effectiveness of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), renal denervation (RDN), darusentan and central arteriovenous anastomosis (CAA) for patients with ATRHTN by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Data Sources: Studies from recent meta-analyses for RDN and placebo effect were supplemented with a systematic search for MRAs in ATRHTN in the Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases through November 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials comparing treatment options for patients with ATRHTN.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted using predefined data extraction forms, including the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. A Bayesian random effects model was used to conduct a network meta-analysis. Spironolactone was used as the main comparator. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reduction in 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM).

RESULTS

Twenty articles met our inclusion criteria, and seven treatment alternatives were compared. Compared to MRA, CAA had the highest probability of being more effective, further reducing 24-h SBP (-4.8 mmHg [-13.0, 3.7]) and 24-h DBP (-9.7 mmHg [-18, -0.63]). This difference is likely to be clinically meaningful, with a probability of 78 and 96% at a threshold of a 2-mmHg reduction in blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared to MRA as anchor, darusentan, CAA and RDN are not more effective in achieving a clinically significant reduction in ambulatory blood pressure in individuals with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension.

Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists for Treatment of Hypertension and Heart Failure

Spironolactone and eplerenone are both mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. These compounds block both the epithelial and nonepithelial actions of aldosterone, with the latter assuming increasing clinical relevance. Spironolactone and eplerenone both affect reductions in blood pressure either as mono- or add-on therapy; moreover, they each afford survival benefits in diverse circumstances of heart failure and the probability of renal protection in proteinuric chronic kidney disease. However, as use of mineralocorticoid-blocking agents has expanded, the hazards inherent in taking such drugs have become more apparent. Whereas the endocrine side effects of spironolactone are in most cases little more than a cosmetic annoyance, the potassium-sparing effects of both spironolactone and eplerenone can prove disastrous, even fatal, if sufficient degrees of hyperkalemia emerge. For most patients, however, the risk of developing hyperkalemia in and of itself should not discourage the sensible clinician from bringing these compounds into play. Hyperkalemia should always be considered a possibility in patients receiving either of these medications; therefore, anticipatory steps should be taken to minimize the likelihood of its occurrence if long-term therapy of these agents is being considered.

[Benefits of spironolactone as the optimal treatment for drug resistant hypertension. Pathway-2 trial review]

Pathway-2 is the first randomised, double-blind and crossover trial that compares spironolactone as a fourth drug with alfa-blocker, beta-blocker and placebo. This study shows that spironolactone is the drug with more possibilities of success for the management of patients with difficult-to-treat hypertension in patients with a combination of three drugs and poor control. The results validate the widespread treatment with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in resistant hypertension.

Efficacy and Safety of Spironolactone in Patients with Resistant Hypertension: A Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The treatment of resistant hypertension (RH) is challenging. Several observational studies have suggested that the addition of spironolactone to triple-drug therapy might have a promising anti-hypertensive effect on RH. To provide more definite evidence for the benefit of spironolactone, we performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of spironolactone in RH patients.

METHODS

Articles were searched from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Randomised controlled trials investigating the effect of additional spironolactone on office blood pressure (BP), ambulatory BP or adverse events in RH patients were included for analysis. Then quality assessment, subgroup, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Five RCTs involving a total of 553 patients were eligible for inclusion. Compared with control therapies, additional spironolactone treatment in RH patients significantly decreased 24-h ambulatory systolic BP (ASBP, weight mean difference [WMD]= -10.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -12.30 to -8.71, P<0.001), 24-h ambulatory diastolic BP (ADBP, WMD = -4.09, 95% CI = -5.28 to -2.91, P<0.001), daytime ASBP (WMD = -10.20, 95% CI = -12.41 to -7.99, P<0.001), daytime ADBP (WMD = -4.14, 95% CI = -5.50 to -2.78, P<0.001), night-time ASBP (WMD = -10.02, 95% CI = -12.63 to -7.41), night-time ADBP (WMD=-3.21, 95% CI=-4.84 to -1.58, P<0.001), office systolic BP (WMD=-16.99, 95% CI=-25.04 to -8.95, P<0.001) and office diastolic BP (WMD=-6.18, 95% CI=-9.30 to -3.05, P<0.001). However, serum potassium might be slightly elevated by additional spironolactone (WMD=0.181, 95% CI=0.042 to 0.319, P=0.011).

CONCLUSION

Spironolactone combined with triple-drug therapy may be an effective and relatively safe strategy for the management of RH patients.

Approach to Antihypertensive Therapy

Antihypertensive agents are commonly prescribed by physicians to prevent the long-term mortality from chronic hypertension. They are also given to improve survival in a number of conditions (eg, heart failure, coronary artery disease), independent of the effect on blood pressure. Several classes of antihypertensives are available with unique pharmacologic characteristics and adverse effects. Not all agents in the same class have identical effects, and careful selection of drugs based on the comorbid conditions is recommended.