Emergency room management of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies

Clinical Outcomes in Hypertensive Emergency: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background To study the prevalence and types of hypertension-mediated organ damage and the prognosis of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with hypertensive emergencies. Methods and Results PubMed was queried from inception through November 30, 2021. Studies were included if they reported the prevalence or prognosis of hypertensive emergencies in patients presenting to the ED. Studies reporting data on hypertensive emergencies in other departments were excluded. The extracted data were arcsine transformed and pooled using a random-effects model. Fifteen studies (n=4370 patients) were included. Pooled analysis demonstrates that the prevalence of hypertensive emergencies was 0.5% (95% CI, 0.40%-0.70%) in all patients presenting to ED and 35.9% (95% CI, 26.7%-45.5%) among patients presenting in ED with hypertensive crisis. Ischemic stroke (28.1% [95% CI, 18.7%-38.6%]) was the most prevalent hypertension-mediated organ damage, followed by pulmonary edema/acute heart failure (24.1% [95% CI, 19.0%-29.7%]), hemorrhagic stroke (14.6% [95% CI, 9.9%-20.0%]), acute coronary syndrome (10.8% [95% CI, 7.3%-14.8%]), renal failure (8.0% [95% CI, 2.9%-15.5%]), subarachnoid hemorrhage (6.9% [95% CI, 3.9%-10.7%]), encephalopathy (6.1% [95% CI, 1.9%-12.4%]), and the least prevalent was aortic dissection (1.8% [95% CI, 1.1%-2.8%]). Prevalence of in-hospital mortality among patients with hypertensive emergency was 9.9% (95% CI, 1.4%-24.6%). Conclusions Our findings demonstrate a pattern of hypertension-mediated organ damage primarily affecting the brain and heart, substantial cardiovascular renal morbidity and mortality, as well as subsequent hospitalization in patients with hypertensive emergencies presenting to the ED.

Oral agents for acute severe hypertension in children with minimal or no symptoms

Acute hypertension is common among children admitted to hospital, and large or rapid increases in blood pressure place children at risk of complications such as posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Guidelines in the United States and Europe now include definitions guiding the identification of acute severe hypertension (otherwise known as hypertensive crisis) and its management. This review discusses these recommendations and the appropriate use of oral antihypertensive agents for children with minimal or no symptoms. We focus on the role of oral calcium channel blockers, including isradipine (a second-generation dihydropyridine), given recent changes to regulatory approvals in Australia. The differing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of agents are compared, with the aim of facilitating directed drug selection and dosing.

The Management of Hypertensive Emergencies-Is There a "Magical" Prescription for All?

Hypertensive emergencies (HE) represent high cardiovascular risk situations defined by a severe increase in blood pressure (BP) associated with acute, hypertension mediated organ damage (A-HMOD) to the heart, brain, retina, kidneys, and large arteries. Blood pressure values alone do not accurately predict the presence of HE; therefore, the search for A-HMOD should be the first step in the management of acute severe hypertension. A rapid therapeutic intervention is mandatory in order to limit and promote regression of end-organ damage, minimize the risk of complications, and improve patient outcomes. Drug therapy for HE, target BP, and the speed of BP decrease are all dictated by the type of A-HMOD, specific drug pharmacokinetics, adverse drug effects, and comorbidities. Therefore, a tailored approach is warranted. However, there is currently a lack of solid evidence for the appropriate treatment strategies for most HE. This article reviews current pharmacological strategies while providing a stepwise, evidence based approach for the management of HE.

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

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

Poor guideline adherence in a real-world evaluation of hypertensive emergency management

BACKGROUND

The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association define hypertensive emergency (HTN-E) as a systolic blood pressure greater than 180 mmHg or a diastolic blood pressure greater than 120 mmHg with evidence of end-organ damage (EOD). Based on expert opinion, current guidelines recommend antihypertensive therapy to reduce blood pressure (BP) at specific hourly rates to reduce progression of EOD, outlined by four criteria. Our goal was to describe compliance with guideline recommendations for early management of HTN-E and to analyze safety outcomes related to pharmacologic intervention.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review including patients presenting to the emergency department with HTN-E between September 2016 and August 2020. We excluded patients with a compelling indication for altered therapeutic goals (e.g. acute aortic dissection, hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke, and pheochromocytoma). The primary outcome was complete adherence with guideline recommendations in the first 24 h.

RESULTS

Of 758 screened records, 402 were included. Mean age was 54 years and majority Black race (72%). Overall, total adherence was poor (<1%): 30% received intravenous therapy within 1 h, 64% achieved 1-h BP goals, 44% achieved 6-h goals, and 9% had appropriate 24-h maintenance BP. Hypotensive events (N = 67) were common and antihypertensive-associated EOD (N = 21) did occur. Predictors of hypotension include treatment within 1 h and management with continuous infusion medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Current practice is poorly compliant with guideline criteria and there are risks associated with recommended treatments. Our results favor relaxing the expert opinion-based recommendations.

Evaluation of the clinical outcome of captopril use for hypertensive urgency in Khartoum State's emergency centres

Background

Captopril is an important drug and is used to control hypertensive urgency world-wide. But there is very little data available regarding the evaluation of its outcomes in hypertensive urgency among African patients. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of captopril use for hypertensive urgency at a selection of Sudanese emergency centres.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study, conducted between 15 to 30 November 2015. A total of 50 patients, attending a selection of Khartoum State hospital emergency centres, with a clinical diagnosis of hypertensive urgency were approached by investigators for the study. Dose regimen, prognosis, and reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were collected alongside a questionaire to patients regarding their care (compliance, etc.). Data were analysed using the Chi-square Test to compare the mean differences for various results. Differences were considered to be significant at P < 0.05.

Results

Around two-thirds (60%) of participants were female, and 28% were non-compliant with treatment. A 25mg dose of captopril was the most frequently used dose. Most of the patients (66%) did not have pre-existing disease. The majority of patients showed an improved blood pressure: both systolic and diastolic blood pressures were reduced by 16-25% and 5-15%, respectively.

Conclusion

The study concluded that the dose of 25 mg of captopril is effective in managing hypertensive urgency and controlling the blood pressure. We also recommend that patients receiving captopril must be observed in the emergency centre for further evaluation.

Oral short-acting antihypertensive medications and the occurrence of stroke: a nationwide case-crossover study

The purpose of the study was to clarify whether short-acting antihypertensives are associated with the occurrence of ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). This was a retrospective case-crossover study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. We identified all adult patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of ischemic stroke or ICH between January 2005 and December 2013. For each case, short-term and long-term exposure to short-acting antihypertensives, including nifedipine, labetalol and captopril, during the case vs. control periods were compared, and odd ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ischemic stroke or ICH were calculated with adjustment for confounders. Among 272785 ischemic stroke and 77798 ICH patients, the mean age was 77.8 ± 14.3 years and 70.8 ± 16.6 years, respectively. The short-term use of the three short-acting antihypertensives were all associated with an increase in the incidence of ischemic stroke (nifedipine: OR 4.51, 95% CIs 3.99-5.11; labetalol: OR 2.07; 95% CIs 1.71-2.51; captopril: OR 1.98, 95% CIs 1.72-2.29) and ICH (nifedipine: OR 2.98, 95% CIs 2.30-3.84; labetalol: OR 2.37; 95% CIs 1.66-3.39; captopril: OR 2.48; 95% CIs 1.69-3.63). The long-term use of short-acting nifedipine for 30 days was associated with a modest increase in the risk for ischemic stroke (OR 1.86; 95% CIs 1.42-2.45). Overall, the short-term use of short-acting antihypertensives is associated with a modest increase in the incidence of stroke, and short-acting nifedipine is linked to a substantial rise in the incidence of ischemic stroke. The long-term use of short-acting nifedipine was also related to an increased incidence of ischemic stroke. Physicians should be cautious of prescribing these short-acting antihypertensives.

KSHF Guidelines for the Management of Acute Heart Failure: Part III. Specific Management of Acute Heart Failure According to the Etiology and Co-morbidity

The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is on the rise due to the aging of society. Furthermore, the continuous progress and widespread adoption of screening and diagnostic strategies have led to an increase in the detection rate of HF, effectively increasing the number of patients requiring monitoring and treatment. Because HF is associated with substantial rates of mortality and morbidity, as well as high socioeconomic burden, there is an increasing need for developing specific guidelines for HF management. The Korean guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic heart failure (CHF) were introduced in March 2016. However, CHF and acute heart failure (AHF) represent distinct disease entities. Here, we introduce the Korean guidelines for the management of AHF with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Part III of this guideline covers management strategies optimized according to the etiology of AHF and the presence of co-morbidities.

Hypertensive crisis: an update on clinical approach and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Here, we review current concepts on hypertensive crisis (HTN-C) with a focus on epidemiology, causes, pathophysiology and prognosis. We also offer a practical approach to the management of HTN-C.

RECENT FINDINGS

HTN-C is characterized by a severe and abrupt increase in blood pressure (BP) with impending or progressive acute end-organ damage (EOD). HTN-C can be divided into hypertensive emergency (HTN-E) and hypertensive urgency (HTN-U) based on the presence or absence of acute EOD, respectively. Recent retrospective studies have demonstrated that emergency department (ED) referrals from an outpatient clinic or rapid BP-lowering strategies in the ED do not lead to improved outcomes in patients with HTN-U.

SUMMARY

HTN-C can be a de-novo manifestation or a complication of essential or secondary HTN. The presence of acute EOD is a major poor prognostic indicator in HTN-C. The main objectives of the management of HTN-C are distinction of HTN-E from HTN-U and appropriate risk stratification, prevention or regression of acute EOD due to severely elevated BP, prevention of recurrence of HTN-C with an effective long-term management plan and avoidance of rapid lowering of BP except in some special circumstances. The majority of patients with asymptomatic HTN-U can be safely managed in the outpatient setting without exposing them to the risks of aggressive BP lowering. However, patients with HTN-E require hospitalization, prompt treatment and close monitoring.

Trends in the Incidence of Hypertensive Emergencies in US Emergency Departments From 2006 to 2013

Background

The incidence of hypertensive emergency in US emergency departments (ED) is not well established.

Methods and Results

This study is a descriptive epidemiological analysis of nationally representative ED visit‐level data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample for 2006–2013. Nationwide Emergency Department Sample is a publicly available database maintained by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. An ED visit was considered to be a hypertensive emergency if it met all the following criteria: diagnosis of acute hypertension, at least 1 diagnosis indicating acute target organ damage, and qualifying disposition (admission to the hospital, death, or transfer to another facility). The incidence of adult ED visits for acute hypertension increased monotonically in the period from 2006 through 2013, from 170 340 (1820 per million adult ED visits overall) to 496 894 (4610 per million). Hypertensive emergency was rare overall, accounting for 63 406 visits (677 per million adult ED visits overall) in 2006 to 176 769 visits (1670 per million) in 2013. Among adult ED visits that had any diagnosis of hypertension, hypertensive emergency accounted for 3309 per million in 2006 and 6178 per million in 2013.

Conclusions

The estimated number of visits for hypertensive emergency and the rate per million adult ED visits has more than doubled from 2006 to 2013. However, hypertensive emergencies are rare overall, occurring in about 2 in 1000 adult ED visits overall, and 6 in 1000 adult ED visits carrying any diagnosis of hypertension in 2013. This figure is far lower than what has been sometimes cited in previous literature.

An Emergency Department Approach to Drug Treatment of Hypertensive Urgency and Emergency

Patients who present with hypertensive urgency or emergency require immediate attention to assess the severity of illness. Guidelines from the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure are available but do little to address the management of acute elevations in blood pressure. Various treatment options, both old and new, exist to manage these patients in the emergency department. Decisions on therapy are patient specific and depend on the underlying cause of elevated blood pressure. This article sets out to describe specific patient presentations and reviews current available options in the management of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies.

An update on hypertensive emergencies and urgencies

Severe acute arterial hypertension is usually defined as 'hypertensive crisis', although 'hypertensive emergencies' or 'hypertensive urgencies', as suggested by the Joint National Committee and the European Society of Hypertension, have completely different diagnostic and therapeutic approaches.The prevalence and demographics of hypertensive emergencies and urgencies have changed over the last four decades, but hypertensive emergencies and urgencies are still associated with significant morbidity and mortality.Different scientific societies have repeatedly produced up-to-date guidelines; however, the treatment of hypertensive emergencies and urgencies is still inappropriate, with potential clinical implications.This review focuses on hypertensive emergencies and urgencies management and treatment, as suggested by recent data.

Patients with hypertensive crises who are admitted to a coronary care unit: clinical characteristics and outcomes

Patients with hypertensive crises, especially hypertensive emergencies, require immediate admittance to an intensive care unit for rapid blood pressure (BP) control. The authors analyzed the prevalence of hypertensive crisis, the clinical characteristics, and the evolution of patients with hypertensive emergencies and urgencies. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to their BP values: group I, predominant systolic hypertension (≥180/≤119 mm Hg); group II, severe systolic and diastolic hypertension (≥180/≥120 mm Hg); and group III, predominant diastolic hypertension (≤179/≥120 mm Hg). Of all of the patients admitted to a coronary care unit, 538 experienced a hypertensive crisis, which represented 5.08% of all admissions. Hypertensive emergency was predominant in 76.6% of the cases, which corresponded to acute coronary syndrome and acute decompensated heart failure in 59.5% and 25.2% of the cases, respectively. A pattern of predominant systolic hypertension (≥180/≤119 mm Hg) was most commonly observed in the hypertensive crisis group (71.4%) and the hypertensive emergency group (72.1%). The medications that were most commonly used at onset included intravenous vasodilators (nitroglycerin in 63.4% and sodium nitroprusside in 16.4% of the patients). The overall mortality rate was 3.7%. The mortality rate was 4.6% for hypertensive emergency cases and 0.8% for hypertensive urgencies cases.

Intravenous hydralazine for blood pressure management in the hospitalized patient: its use is often unjustified

Due to observations of increased off-label use of intravenous hydralazine in area hospitals, we studied its use in a university teaching hospital. Patients were prospectively identified between April and October 2010 with a pharmacy order for intravenous hydralazine. Demographic and clinical information, including pretreatment blood pressure (BP), change in BP and heart rate within 2 hours after administration of hydralazine, and adverse events were obtained. Ninety-four patients (mean age, 69 ± 18 years, 48% women, 89% with known hypertension) received 201 intravenous hydralazine doses (mean dose of 11.4 ± 4.3 mg). Only 4 (2%) patients had evidence of an urgent hypertensive condition. Following hydralazine, BP was reduced by 24/9 ± 29/15 mmHg and heart rate increased by 4 ± 13 beats per minute. Changes from baseline in BP were related to baseline BP. Seventeen patients experienced an adverse event, the most common being hypotension (n = 11). Intravenous hydralazine is commonly prescribed for non-urgent cases of hypertension in the hospitalized patient. While changes in systolic BP are related to baseline BP values, they are highly variable, and associated with hypotension. Thus, this agent may not be useful for treating hypertension in many hospitalized patients and may cause harm if used inappropriately.

Results of a survey of blood pressure monitoring by intensivists in critically ill patients: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVES

Maintenance of mean arterial pressure>65 mm Hg has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in many studies of critically ill patients. Current guidelines for the management of septic shock and guidelines for managing other critical illnesses suggest intra-arterial blood pressure measurement is preferred over automated oscillometric noninvasive blood pressure measurement. Despite these recommendations, anecdotal experience suggested that the use of noninvasive blood pressure measurement in our institution and others in preference to intra-arterial blood pressure measurement remained prevalent.

DESIGN

We designed an online survey and sent it by e-mail.

SETTING

Intensive care units.

PATIENTS AND SUBJECTS

A randomly selected group from the membership of the Society for Critical Care Medicine.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Use of non-invasive and invasive blood pressure devices. Eight hundred eighty individuals received an invitation to complete the survey and 149 responded. We found that 71% (105 of 149) of intensivists estimated the correct cuff size rather than measuring arm circumference directly. In hypotensive patients, 73% of respondents (108 of 149) reported using noninvasive blood pressure measurement measurements for patient management. In patients on a vasopressor medication, 47% (70 of 149) of respondents reported using noninvasive blood pressure measurement for management.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of noninvasive blood pressure measurement measurements in critically ill patients is common despite the paucity of evidence validating its accuracy in critically ill patients. Given this widespread use, accuracy and precision validation studies comparing noninvasive blood pressure measurement with intra-arterial blood pressure measurement in critically ill patients should be performed.

The optometrist's role in the management of hypertensive crises

BACKGROUND

In hypertensive crises, ocular findings are pivotal to making correct management decisions. Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-7) guidelines define hypertensive crises as blood pressure greater than 180/120 mmHg associated with signs or symptoms of target organ damage. Urgent cases are those without optic disc edema but that necessitate control within 24 to 72 hours. Emergent cases are those with optic disc edema, also known as malignant hypertension, demanding control within 1 to 6 hours.

CASE REPORTS

Two cases are illustrated, as might be seen in optometric offices, of severe stage II hypertension. In case 1, the acute elevation of blood pressure (220/110 mmHg), was assessed as an urgent case and was correctly managed with the primary care provider through outpatient care. The second case of acute elevation of blood pressure (250/150 mmHg) and ocular findings of severe hypertensive retinopathy was sent as an emergent case to the emergency room.

CONCLUSION

These cases exemplify optometric in-office decisions to effectively manage urgent and emergent cases of hypertensive crises. Utilizing an urgent versus emergent classification of retinopathy can lead to the appropriate management decision for these patients.

Oral drugs for hypertensive urgencies: systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

Hypertensive urgencies are defined as severe elevations in blood pressure without evidence of acute or progressive target-organ damage. The need for treatment is considered urgent but allows for slow control using oral or sublingual drugs. If the increase in blood pressure is not associated with risk to life or acute target-organ damage, blood pressure control must be implemented slowly over 24 hours. For hypertensive urgencies, it is not known which class of antihypertensive drug provides the best results and there is controversy regarding when to use antihypertensive drugs and which ones to use in these situations. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of oral drugs for hypertensive urgencies.

METHODS

This systematic review of the literature was developed at the Brazilian Cochrane Center, and in the Discipline of Emergency Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine at the Universidade Federal de São Paulo - Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), in accordance with the methodology of the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Sixteen randomized clinical trials including 769 participants were selected. They showed that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors had a superior effect in treating hypertensive urgencies, evaluated among 223 participants. The commonest adverse event for calcium channel blockers were headache (35/206), flushing (17/172) and palpitations (14/189). For angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the principal side effect was bad taste (25/38).

CONCLUSIONS

There is important evidence in favor of the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for treating hypertensive urgencies, compared with calcium channel blockers, considering the better effectiveness and the lower frequency of adverse effects (like headache and flushing).

Treatment of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies

Although systemic hypertension is a common clinical condition, hypertensive emergencies are unusual in clinical practice. There are some situations, however, that qualify as hypertensive emergencies or urgencies. It is important, therefore, to diagnose these acute conditions, in which immediate treatment of hypertension is indicated. The diagnosis of hypertensive emergencies depends on consideration of the clinical manifestations as well as the absolute level of blood pressure. Manifestations of hypertensive emergencies can be quite profound, but they vary depending on the target organ that is affected. Thus, an accurate clinical diagnosis is necessary to render appropriate therapy. Fortunately, effective drug therapy is available to lower the blood pressure quickly in hypertensive emergencies. Physicians should be familiar with the pharmacologic and clinical actions of drugs in treating hypertensive emergencies. With proper clinical diagnosis, hypertensive emergencies can be successfully treated, and complications can be largely prevented with timely intervention.

Coronary emergency and diabetes as manifestations of pheochromocytoma

We report on a woman with refractory hypertension and diabetes suffering from hypertensive crises, one with chest pain suggesting acute coronary syndrome, and another with an abdominal pain, after which a para-aortic abdominal mass was diagnosed, by ultrasound, as pheochromocytoma, later confirmed by an adrenal scintigraphic study with (131)I-labeled metaiodobenzylguanidine. The patient was successfully treated with complete reversal of hypertension and diabetes. Our case illustrates the importance of maintaining a high index of suspicion in patients simultaneously presenting with an acute myocardial event and hypertensive crises.

Management of hypertensive crises

Hypertensive emergencies are life-threatening conditions because their course is complicated with acute target organ damage. They can present with neurological, renal, cardiovascular, microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, and obstetric complications. After diagnosis, they require the immediate reduction of blood pressure (in <1 hour) with intravenous drugs such as sodium nitroprusside, administered in an intensive care unit. These patients present with a mean arterial pressure >140 mm Hg and grade III to IV retinopathy. Only occasionally do they have hypertensive encephalopathy, reflecting cerebral hyperperfusion, loss of autoregulation, and disruption of the blood-brain barrier. In hypertensive emergencies, blood pressure should be reduced about 10% during the first hour and another 15% gradually over the next 2 to 3 hours to prevent cerebral hypoperfusion. The exception to this management strategy is aortic dissection, for which the target is systolic blood pressure <120 mm Hg after 20 minutes. Oral antihypertensive therapy can usually be instituted after 6 to 12 hours of parenteral therapy. Hypertensive urgencies are severe elevations of blood pressure without evidence of acute and progressive dysfunction of target organs. They demand adequate control of blood pressure within 24 hours to several days with use of orally administered agents. The purpose of this review is to provide a rational approach to hypertensive crisis management.

Drug Treatment of Hypertensive Urgencies and Emergencies

Although systemic hypertension is a common clinical condition, hypertensive emergencies are distinctly unusual in clinical practice. There are some situations, however, that qualify as hypertensive emergencies or urgencies. It is important, therefore, to diagnose these conditions because immediate treatment of severe hypertension is indicated. The diagnosis of hypertensive emergencies depends on the consideration of the clinical manifestations as well as the absolute level of blood pressure. Depending on the target organ that is affected, manifestations of hypertensive emergencies can be quite profound, yet variable. Thus, the physician has to make an accurate clinical diagnosis properly to render appropriate therapy. Fortunately, effective drug therapy is available to decrease blood pressure quickly in hypertensive emergencies. Physicians should be familiar with the pharmacologic and clinical actions of drugs that are used in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies. With proper clinical diagnosis, hypertensive emergencies can be treated successfully and the complications can be prevented with timely intervention. This review discusses the treatment of hypertensive emergencies in general and the therapeutic role of fenoldopam in particular.

Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure

The National High Blood Pressure Education Program presents the complete Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Like its predecessors, the purpose is to provide an evidence-based approach to the prevention and management of hypertension. The key messages of this report are these: in those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure (BP) of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, CVD risk doubles for each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; those who are normotensive at 55 years of age will have a 90% lifetime risk of developing hypertension; prehypertensive individuals (systolic BP 120-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP 80-89 mm Hg) require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent the progressive rise in blood pressure and CVD; for uncomplicated hypertension, thiazide diuretic should be used in drug treatment for most, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes; this report delineates specific high-risk conditions that are compelling indications for the use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers); two or more antihypertensive medications will be required to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg) for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease; for patients whose BP is more than 20 mm Hg above the systolic BP goal or more than 10 mm Hg above the diastolic BP goal, initiation of therapy using two agents, one of which usually will be a thiazide diuretic, should be considered; regardless of therapy or care, hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan. Positive experiences, trust in the clinician, and empathy improve patient motivation and satisfaction. This report serves as a guide, and the committee continues to recognize that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

Hypertensive emergencies: diagnosis and management

The treatment of hypertension is preventive medicine. This principle applies in the emergency room as well as the clinic. However, there are crucial contrasts between these two care settings related to specific goals of management for real emergencies and nonemergency conditions. In the emergency room, rapid triage is necessary to separate those who can safely be sent home for future clinic assessment from those who require immediate interventions including short stays in 24-hour observation units or hospitalization for more serious problems. This review focuses on decisions related to hypertension management in the emergency room and over brief periods of observation and treatment. Strategy is supported by evidence-based considerations whenever possible. Where outcome studies are not available, we rely on the rationale derived from relevant clinical research.