Beneficial effect of calcium channel blockers on home blood pressure variability in the morning in patients with type 2 diabetes

Blood Pressure Variability as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease: Which Antihypertensive Agents Are More Effective?

Blood pressure oscillations during different time scales, known as blood pressure variability (BPV), have become a focus of growing scientific interest. BPV can be measured at long-term (seasonal variability or visit-to-visit), at mid-term (differences in consecutive days or weeks) or at short-term (day-night differences or changes induced by other daily activities and conditions). An increased BPV, either at long, mid or short-term is associated with a poor cardiovascular prognosis independently of the amount of blood pressure elevation. There is scarce evidence on the effect of different antihypertensive treatments on BPV, but some observational and interventional studies suggest that calcium channel blockers in general, and particularly amlodipine, either in monotherapy or combined with renin-angiotensin system blockers, can reduce BPV more efficiently than other antihypertensive drugs or combinations. Nevertheless, there are several aspects of the relationship between BPV, antihypertensive treatment, and clinical outcomes that are still unknown, and more work should be performed before considering BPV as a therapeutical target in clinical practice.

Amlodipine in the current management of hypertension

Hypertension is the leading cause of death worldwide, affecting 1.4 billion people. Treatment options include the widely used calcium channel blockers, among which amlodipine, a dihydropyridine, has unique characteristics that distinguish it from other drugs within this class. This review aims to provide an updated overview of the evidence supporting the use of amlodipine over the past 30 years and highlights its cardiovascular benefits in current hypertension management. Amlodipine has low renal clearance (7 mL/min/mg) and long half-life (35-50 h) and duration of action, which allows it to sustain its anti-hypertensive effect for more than 24 h following a single dose. Additionally, blood pressure (BP) control is maintained even when a dose has been missed, providing continuous protection in case of incidental noncompliance. It has proven to reduce BP variability and successfully lower BP. Amlodipine also controls BP in patients with a systolic/diastolic BP of 130/80 mm Hg or higher, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease without worsening glycemic or kidney function. Additionally, amlodipine is a wise choice for older adults due to its ability to control BP and protect against stroke and myocardial infarction. Side effects of amlodipine include edema, palpitations, dizziness, and flushing, which are more common with the higher dose of 10 mg. Amlodipine is cost effective and predicted to be cost saving when compared with usual care.

Pharmacogenomics of amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide therapy and the quest for improved control of hypertension: a mini review

Blood pressure (BP) is a complex trait that is regulated by multiple physiological pathways and include but is not limited to extracellular fluid volume homeostasis, cardiac contractility, and vascular tone through renal, neural, or endocrine systems. Uncontrolled hypertension (HTN) has been associated with an increased mortality risk. Therefore, understanding the genetics that underpins and influence BP regulation will have a major impact on public health. Moreover, uncontrolled HTN has been linked to inter-individual variation in the drugs’ response and this has been associated with an individual’s genetics architecture. However, the identification of candidate genes that underpin the genetic basis of HTN remains a major challenge. To date, few variants associated with inter-individual BP regulation have been identified and replicated. Research in this field has accelerated over the past 5 years as a direct result of on-going genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and the progress in the identification of rare gene variants and mutations, epigenetic markers, and the regulatory pathways involved in the pathophysiology of BP. In this review we describe and enhance our current understanding of how genetic variants account for the observed variability in BP response in patients on first-line antihypertensive drugs, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide.

Severity of obstructive sleep apnea is associated with the nocturnal fluctuation of pulse rate, but not with that of blood pressure, in older hypertensive patients receiving calcium channel blockers

AIM

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with increased variability in nocturnal blood pressure (BP). Calcium channel blockers (CCB) are superior to other classes of antihypertensives in decreasing BP variability. We investigated whether OSA severity is associated with nocturnal BP variability in older hypertensive patients treated with CCB.

METHODS

We measured home systolic and diastolic BP and pulse rate (PR) automatically during sleep at an interval of an hour once a week using an electronic sphygmomanometer in 29 hypertensive patients (aged ≥65 years) receiving CCB. We calculated the coefficient of variation (CV) from four consecutive measurements. All patients underwent a home-based portable sleep study.

RESULTS

We found no difference in PR, BP or CV of BP between the patients with no-to-mild OSA and with moderate-to-severe OSA, categorized by the respiratory disturbance index (RDI) and 3% oxygen desaturation index (ODI). The CV of PR in patients with moderate-to-severe OSA was higher than the patients with no-to-mild OSA categorized by 3% ODI (P = 0.01). Body mass index was correlated with RDI and 3% ODI (r = 0.56 and 0.43, respectively). The CV of BP did not correlate to RDI or 3% ODI. The CV of PR was positively correlated both with RDI and with 3% ODI (r = 0.41 and 0.42, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of OSA was associated with PR variability, but not with BP variability, in older patients receiving CCB. Our results suggest the need for future studies to determine whether CCB can suppress the influence of OSA on BP fluctuation during sleep. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 604-610.

Cross-sectional study of the association between day-to-day home blood pressure variability and visceral fat area measured using the dual impedance method

Background

The blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) is a predictor of cardiovascular disease, independently of the BP itself. In addition, visceral fat accumulation can trigger atherosclerotic disease through various mechanisms.

Methods and results

We examined the association between fat accumulation and day-to-day BPV in 61 adult hypertensive patients. Visceral fat area (VFA) was measured using the dual bioelectrical impedance analysis method. Participants were divided into three groups based on VFA. The standard deviation (SD) in home systolic BP (SBP) for 7 consecutive days was significantly lower in the high VFA tertile (low VFA, 8.40±4.15 mmHg; intermediate VFA, 8.47±2.80 mmHg; and high VFA, 5.84±2.37 mmHg, p of One-way ANOVA = 0.017, p for trend = 0.0126). A similar association was observed between the coefficient of variance (CV) of home SBP and the VFA tertile. Multiple-regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, antihypertensive drug, diabetes, habitual drinking, and SBP level also showed a significant association between the VFA tertile and the SD or CV of home SBP. The adjusted coefficient of regression for the SD of home SBP was -3.28 (95%CI: -5.60 to -0.97, p = 0.008) and the CV of home SBP was -2.51 (95%CI: -4.31 to -0.71, p = 0.008) for the highest VFA tertile as compared to the lowest VFA tertile.

Conclusions

These results show for the first time negative correlation between VFA and day-to-day BPV. The degree of obesity should be taken into account when evaluating the value of BPV.

Methodology and technology for peripheral and central blood pressure and blood pressure variability measurement: current status and future directions - Position statement of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability

Office blood pressure measurement has been the basis for hypertension evaluation for almost a century. However, the evaluation of blood pressure out of the office using ambulatory or self-home monitoring is now strongly recommended for the accurate diagnosis in many, if not all, cases with suspected hypertension. Moreover, there is evidence that the variability of blood pressure might offer prognostic information that is independent of the average blood pressure level. Recently, advancement in technology has provided noninvasive evaluation of central (aortic) blood pressure, which might have attributes that are additive to the conventional brachial blood pressure measurement. This position statement, developed by international experts, deals with key research and practical issues in regard to peripheral blood pressure measurement (office, home, and ambulatory), blood pressure variability, and central blood pressure measurement. The objective is to present current achievements, identify gaps in knowledge and issues concerning clinical application, and present relevant research questions and directions to investigators and manufacturers for future research and development (primary goal).

Olmesartan with azelnidipine versus with trichlormethiazide on home blood pressure variability in patients with type II diabetes mellitus

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of olmesartan combined with azelnidipine versus olmesartan combined with trichlormethiazide, on home blood pressure (BP) and pressure variability in type II diabetes mellitus patients using home BP telemonitoring system. We performed an open-label cross-over pilot study of 28 patients with type II diabetes mellitus. Patients received combination treatment with either olmesartan 20 mg plus azelnidipine 16 mg or olmesartan 20 mg plus trichlormethiazide 1 mg for more than 6 weeks each in a cross-over method. The coefficient of morning systolic BP variability in the olmesartan plus azelnidipine group was significantly lower than that in the olmesartan plus trichlormethiazide group (6.4 ± 1.9 vs. 7.5 ± 2.6, P = .004). There were no significant differences in mean morning systolic BP between the two groups. Using home BP telemonitoring for hypertensive patients with type II diabetes, this study revealed for the first time that the olmesartan with azelnidipine combination is superior to the olmesartan with trichlormethiazide combination in reducing home BP variability.

Blood pressure variability after catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation in patients with resistant hypertension

BACKGROUND

Renal denervation (RDN) reduces sympathetic activity and blood pressure (BP) in patients with resistant hypertension. Increased 24-h BP variability is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes and related to sympathetic activation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This multicenter study investigated the effect of RDN on BP variability in 84 patients with uncontrolled hypertension (office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg) despite treatment with greater than three antihypertensive agents. BP variability was assessed by means of standard deviation, coefficient of variation (standard deviation/mean), and average real variability of 24-h ambulatory SBP at 3-month and 6-month follow-up. RDN significantly reduced office BP by 17/6 mmHg at 3-month and 19/7 mmHg at 6-month follow-up (P < 0.001 for all) and 24-h ambulatory BP by 9/5 mmHg (P < 0.001/P = 0.001) after 3 months and 12/7 mmHg (P < 0.001/P < 0.001) after 6 months. Standard deviation significantly decreased from 17.1 to 14.9 mmHg (P = 0.008) and 15.3 mmHg (P = 0.037), consistent with a reduction of coefficient of variation from 0.116 to 0.103 (P = 0.035) and 0.104 (P = 0.071) and average real variability from 12.3 to 10.9 (P = 0.029) and 11.0 (P = 0.054) after 3-month and 6-month, respectively. Interestingly, also BP nonresponders (change in office systolic BP < 10 mmHg after 6 months) showed a significant reduction of standard deviation after 3 months (P = 0.041, n = 26) and a borderline significant reduction at 6-month (P = 0.057, n = 28).

CONCLUSIONS

RDN reduces office and ambulatory BP and BP variability in patients with resistant hypertension. Improvement in BP variability was also documented in patients characterized as office BP nonresponders after 6 months.

Blood pressure variability: assessment, predictive value, and potential as a therapeutic target

A large body of evidence has consistently supported the relationship between blood pressure (BP) levels and the risk of cardiovascular complications. In recent years, several independent studies have also indicated that this risk may not only depend on the magnitude of the blood pressure elevation per se but also on the presence of other associated conditions such as increased blood pressure variability. This concept has been supported by a series of reports, most of which post hoc analyses of clinical trials in hypertension, showing that increasing values of BP variability (BPV) (either in the short term, in the midterm, or in the long term) may predict development, progression, and severity of cardiac, vascular, and renal organ damage, as well as cardiovascular events and mortality. Remarkably, studies conducted in populations at high cardiovascular risk have shown increasing values of BPV in the individual subjects (so-called intra- or within-individual BPV) to be strong predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, even to a larger extent than average BP values. However, in subjects at low to moderate cardiovascular risk, the contribution of BPV to cardiovascular risk prediction over and beyond average BP values has been shown to be only moderate. The aim of this paper is to critically review the evidence addressing the prognostic relevance of different components of BPV addressing a yet open question, i.e., whether routine assessment of BPV in clinical practice should be regarded as an additional target of antihypertensive treatment to improve cardiovascular protection.

Blood Pressure Variability: Prognostic Value and Therapeutic Implications

Blood pressure variability (BPV) is considered nowadays a novel risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Early findings in sinoaortic denervated rats have clearly shown that enhanced fluctuation of blood pressure induced left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular stiffness, and renal lesion. A large number of clinical trials confirm that short-term and long-term blood pressure variability independently contributes to target organ damage, cardiovascular events, and mortality not only in hypertensive patients but also in subjects with diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Therefore, amelioration of BPV has been suggested as an additional target of the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. Preliminary evidence obtained from meta-analysis and controlled clinical trials has shown that antihypertensive classes differ in their ability to control excessive BP fluctuations with an impact in the prevention of cardiovascular events. Calcium channel blockers seem to be more effective than other blood pressure lowering drugs for the reduction of short-term and long-term BPV. In order to increase actual knowledge regarding the prognostic value and therapeutic significance of BPV in cardiovascular disease, there is a need for additional clinical studies specifically designed for the study of the relevance of short-term and long-term BPV control by antihypertensive drugs.