Truly Refractory Hypertension

Efficacy of Electrical Baroreflex Activation Is Independent of Peripheral Chemoreceptor Modulation

Arterial baroreflex activation through electrical carotid sinus stimulation has been developed for the treatment of resistant hypertension. Previous studies suggested that the peripheral chemoreflex is tonically active in hypertensive patients and may inhibit baroreflex responses. We hypothesized that peripheral chemoreflex activation attenuates baroreflex efficacy evoked by electrical carotid sinus stimulation. We screened 35 patients with an implanted electrical carotid sinus stimulator. Of those, 11 patients with consistent acute depressor response were selected (7 men/4 women, age: 67±8 years, body mass index: 31.6±5.2 kg/m², 6±2 antihypertensive drug classes). We assessed responses to electrical baroreflex stimulation during normoxia, isocapnic hypoxia (SpO₂: 79.0±1.5%), and hyperoxia (40% end-tidal O₂ fraction) by measuring heart rate, blood pressure, ventilation, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO₂ and O₂ fractions, and muscle sympathetic nerve activity. During normoxia, baroreflex activation reduced systolic blood pressure from 164±27 to 151±25 mm Hg (mean±SD, P<0.001), heart rate from 64±13 to 61±13 bpm (P=0.002), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity from 42±12 to 36±12 bursts/min (P=0.004). Hypoxia increased systolic blood pressure 8±12 mm Hg (P=0.057), heart rate 10±6 bpm (P<0.001), muscle sympathetic nerve activity 7±7 bursts/min (P=0.031), and ventilation 10±7 L/min (P=0.002). However, responses to electrical carotid sinus stimulation did not differ between hypoxic and hyperoxic conditions: systolic blood pressure: -15±7 versus -14±8 mm Hg (P=0.938), heart rate: -2±3 versus -2±2 bpm (P=0.701), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity: -6±4 versus -4±3 bursts/min (P=0.531). We conclude that moderate peripheral chemoreflex activation does not attenuate acute responses to electrical baroreflex activation therapy in patients with resistant hypertension. These patients provided insight into human baroreflex-chemoreflex interactions that could not be gained otherwise.

Acute Response to Unilateral Unipolar Electrical Carotid Sinus Stimulation in Patients With Resistant Arterial Hypertension

Bilateral bipolar electric carotid sinus stimulation acutely reduced muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) and blood pressure (BP) in patients with resistant arterial hypertension but is no longer available. The second-generation device uses a smaller unilateral unipolar disk electrode to reduce invasiveness while saving battery life. We hypothesized that the second-generation device acutely lowers BP and MSNA in treatment-resistant hypertensive patients. Eighteen treatment-resistant hypertensive patients (9 women/9 men; 53±11 years; 33±5 kg/m(2)) on stable medications have been included in the study. We monitored finger and brachial BP, heart rate, and MSNA. Without stimulation, BP was 165±31/91±18 mm Hg, heart rate was 75±17 bpm, and MSNA was 48±14 bursts per minute. Acute stimulation with intensities producing side effects that were tolerable in the short term elicited interindividually variable changes in systolic BP (-16.9±15.0 mm Hg; range, 0.0 to -40.8 mm Hg; P=0.002), heart rate (-3.6±3.6 bpm; P=0.004), and MSNA (-2.0±5.8 bursts per minute; P=0.375). Stimulation intensities had to be lowered in 12 patients to avoid side effects at the expense of efficacy (systolic BP, -6.3±7.0 mm Hg; range, 2.8 to -14.5 mm Hg; P=0.028 and heart rate, -1.5±2.3 bpm; P=0.078; comparison against responses with side effects). Reductions in diastolic BP and MSNA (total activity) were correlated (r(2)=0.329; P=0.025). In our patient cohort, unilateral unipolar electric baroreflex stimulation acutely lowered BP. However, side effects may limit efficacy. The approach should be tested in a controlled comparative study.

Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of resistant hypertension

Hypertension is a leading risk factor for the development of several cardiovascular diseases. As the global prevalence of hypertension increases, so too has the recognition of resistant hypertension. Whilst figures vary, the proportion of hypertensive patients that are resistant to multiple drug therapies have been reported to be as high as 16.4 %. Resistant hypertension is typically associated with elevated sympathetic activity and abnormal homeostatic reflex control and is termed neurogenic hypertension because of its presumed central autonomic nervous system origin. This resistance to conventional pharmacological treatment has stimulated a plethora of medical devices to be investigated for use in hypertension, with varying degrees of success. In this review, we discuss a new therapy for drug-resistant hypertension, deep brain stimulation. The utility of deep brain stimulation in resistant hypertension was first discovered in patients with concurrent neuropathic pain, where it lowered blood pressure and improved baroreflex sensitivity. The most promising central target for stimulation is the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray, which has been well characterised in animal studies as a control centre for autonomic outflow. In this review, we will discuss the promise and potential mechanisms of deep brain stimulation in the treatment of severe, resistant hypertension.

Testing devices for the prevention and treatment of stroke and its complications

We are entering a challenging but exciting period when many new interventions may appear for stroke based on the use of devices. Hopefully these will lead to improved outcomes at a cost that can be afforded in most parts of the world. Nevertheless, it is vital that lessons are learnt from failures in the development of pharmacological interventions (and from some early device studies), including inadequate preclinical testing, suboptimal trial design and analysis, and underpowered studies. The device industry is far more disparate than that seen for pharmaceuticals; companies are very variable in size and experience in stroke, and are developing interventions across a wide range of stroke treatment and prevention. It is vital that companies work together where sales and marketing are not involved, including in understanding basic stroke mechanisms, prospective systematic reviews, and education of physicians. Where possible, industry and academics should also work closely together to ensure trials are designed to be relevant to patient care and outcomes. Additionally, regulation of the device industry lags behind that for pharmaceuticals, and it is critical that new interventions are shown to be safe and effective rather than just feasible. Phase IV postmarketing surveillance studies will also be needed to ensure that devices are safe when used in the 'real-world' and to pick up uncommon adverse events.

[Resistant hypertension : What is it?]

When blood pressure is poorly controlled despite treatment with a diuretic and two antihypertensive drugs at adequate doses, the hypertension is termed resistant. The prevalence of resistant hypertension is increasing. Once pseudo-resistance due to poor compliance, secondary forms of hypertension, and massive salt consumption have been excluded, some authorities maintain that blood pressure can be invariably lowered using minoxidil or mineralocorticoid receptor blockade. I also adhered to this belief until we encountered a patient who despite treatment with seven antihypertensive agents, electrical carotid sinus stimulation, and catheter-based renal denervation continued to exhibit extraordinarily high blood pressure values. I am now convinced that resistant hypertension does indeed exist. The prevalence of such patients can be substantially reduced by means of a thorough history and physical examination, determining drug serum concentrations, and excluding secondary causes.

Resistant hypertension: is renal denervation the current treatment of choice?

BACKGROUND

Resistant hypertension is simply defined as failure to control blood pressure <140/90 mmHg in an adherent non-diabetic patient with normal kidney function despite the use of optimal doses of three antihypertensive agents, including a diuretic. Also, control of blood pressure in any adherent patient with more than four antihypertensive agents defines resistant hypertension. In a patient with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, the goal blood pressure is <130/80 mmHg. One of the most important pathophysiological mechanisms of resistant hypertension is overactivity of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). In selected patients with resistant hypertension, renal denervation has been shown to control blood pressure by suppressing SNS overactivity.

SUMMARY

This review summarizes the results of the studies of renal denervation for resistant hypertension and suggests the use of this procedure in several other conditions that are associated with SNS overactivity.

KEY MESSAGE

Renal denervation seems to control blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension.