International Consensus on Standardized Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement - A Call to Action

How many blood pressure measurements should we take in the office?

No consensus has emerged among different guidelines concerning how many blood pressure (BP) measurements should be performed at office visits in the diagnosis of hypertension. The purpose of this study was to examine the compatibility of various multiple average office BP measurements and 24-h BP monitoring (ABPM) in patients followed up in the posthoc analysis of the Cappadocia hypertension cohort. A total 1158 office BP measurements by 207 patients were examined. The results were then classified as G1 (average of the 1st and 2nd BP), G2 (average of the 2nd and 3rd), G3 (average of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th), G4 (average of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th), and G5 (average of all five measurements). Compatibility between the average values in the groups and concomitant 24-h ABPM data was examined. While a significant difference was observed between daytime 24-h ABPM SBP and G1 (p = .002), no difference was found in the other groups. Office DBP approached the daytime 24-h ABPM values as the number of measurements in the five groups increased, although average office DBP data in all groups were higher than daytime 24-h ABPM DBP (p = .000 for all). In light of our study results, we recommend that three office BP measurements be performed and that the average of the 2nd and 3rd measurements be used for SBP, while in terms of DBP, we recommend that as many measurements as possible be taken without the 1st value being included in the average.

Prevalence of masked hypertension in attended versus unattended office blood pressure measurement

There is a controversial debate regarding whether unattended blood pressure (BP) measurement should be regarded as the new gold standard of office BP measurement. Unattended BP measurement eliminates the white-coat effect and reduces external influences on the patient. On the other hand, it might underestimate real-life BP. The present study compares the prevalence of masked hypertension using attended versus unattended office BP measurements. We performed a cross-sectional study on 213 patients in a general practitioner's outpatient clinic and compared attended and unattended office BP with 24h-ambulatory BP monitoring (24h-ABPM). Masked hypertension was defined as pressure ≥135/85 mmHg in daytime ABPM with office systolic BP < 140/90 mmHg. Median attended and unattended office BPs were 140/86 and 134/80 mmHg with a median 24h-BP of 129/79 mmHg and daytime ABP of 133/82 mmHg. The number of patients with masked hypertension was 45/213 (21.2%) using unattended and 23/213 (10.8%) using attended office BP measurements (p < .0001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a 7.4 mmHg systolic and 6.2 mmHg diastolic bias between the attended versus unattended office BP, and two systolic and -1.7 mmHg diastolic biases between the unattended office BP and daytime ambulatory BP. In linear regression analysis, an unattended office BP of 134 mmHg corresponded to 140 mmHg in attended BP measurement. Using a cut-off of 135/85 mmHg instead of 140/90 mmHg in unattended office BP measurement, the rate of masked hypertension was 26/213 (12.2%). Thus, unattended office BP measurement results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of masked hypertension using the traditional definition of hypertension. The present findings suggest that it might be reasonable to use a definition of 135/85 mmHg.

Revisiting Hypertension Treatment in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

Despite being the world's top risk factor for death and disability, hypertension awareness and control within the chronic kidney disease (CKD) population have decreased. This is particularly important considering the heightened severity and management challenges of hypertension in CKD patients, whose outcomes are often worse compared with persons with normal kidney function. Therefore, finding novel therapeutics to improve blood pressure control within this vulnerable group is paramount. Although medications that target the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system remain a mainstay for blood pressure control in most stages of CKD, we discuss novel approaches that may expand their use in advanced CKD. We also review newer tools for blood pressure management that have emerged in recent years, including aldosterone synthase inhibitors, endothelin receptor antagonists, and renal denervation. Overall, the future of hypertension management in CKD appears brighter, with a growing arsenal of tools and a deeper understanding of this complex disease.

Intelligent Assist Office Blood Pressures (IOBP) versus awake ambulatory monitoring and conventional auscultatory office readings in Chinese primary medical institutions

To practice standardized office blood pressure (OBP) measurement guidelines pragmatically, we developed an intelligent assisted OBP (IOBP) measurement system in the Chinese community, which can automatically obtain two or three BP values after a 5-min rest before the patients visit the doctor and transfer values to the community medical network in real time. We conducted a comparative study to investigate the agreement among IOBP, awake ambulatory BP (ABP), and conventional auscultatory OBP at different BP levels. Participants were divided into three groups according to BP, with 120/80 mmHg and 160/100 mmHg as the cut-off points. Attended IOBP, unattended IOBP, and auscultatory OBP were randomly measured before ABP monitoring. In total, 245 participants were included in the analysis. The mean systolic attended/unattended IOBP, auscultatory OBP, and awake ABP were 135.0, 136.7, 135.6, and 136.2 mmHg, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias of -1.1 and 0.5 mmHg for systolic attended/unattended IOBP compared with awake ABP in the overall sample. For auscultatory OBP, the bias was -0.4 (attended) and 1.2 mmHg (unattended). The discrepancy between the systolic attended/unattended IOBP and awake ABP was inconsistent at different BP levels. In Group 1 the values were -8.4 and -6.9 mmHg, whereas in Group 3, the values were 9.4 and 10.0 mmHg. BP measured using the IOBP measurement system was in accordance with awake ABP and conventional OBP, and can be a good choice in the Chinese community.

Comparison of Home and Office Blood Pressure Devices in the Clinical Setting

BACKGROUND

Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring is increasingly used for remote hypertension management, but the real-world performance of home blood pressure (BP) devices is unknown. We examined BP measurements from patients' home devices using the American Medical Association's (AMA) SMBP Device Accuracy Test tool.

METHODS

Patients at a single internal medicine clinic underwent up to five seated, same-arm BP readings using a home device and an automated BP device (Omron HEM-907XL). Following the AMA's three-step protocol, we used the patient's home device for the first, second, and fourth measurements and the office device for the third and fifth (if needed) measurements. Device agreement failure was defined as an absolute difference in systolic BP >10 mm Hg between the home and office devices in either of two confirmatory steps. Performance was examined by brand (Omron vs. non-Omron). Moreover, we examined patient factors associated with agreement failure via logistic regression models adjusted for demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

We evaluated 152 patients (mean age 60 ± 15 years, 58% women, 31% Black) seen between October 2020 and November 2021. Device agreement failure occurred in 22.4% (95% CI: 16.4%, 29.7%) of devices tested, including 19.1% among Omron devices and 27.6% among non-Omron devices (P = 0.23). No patient characteristics were associated with agreement failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Over one-fifth of home devices did not agree based on the AMA SMBP device accuracy protocol. These findings confirm the importance of office-based device comparisons to ensure the accuracy of home BP monitoring.

HEARTS in the Americas: Targeting Health System Change to Improve Population Hypertension Control

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

HEARTS in the Americas is the regional adaptation of Global Hearts, the World Health Organization initiative for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention and control. Its overarching goal is to drive health services to change managerial and clinical practice in primary care settings to improve hypertension control and CVD risk management. This review describes the HEARTS in the Americas initiative. First, the regional epidemiological situation of CVD mortality and population hypertension control trends are summarized; then the rationale for its main intervention components: the primary care-oriented management system and the HEARTS Clinical Pathway are described. Finally, the key factors for accelerating the expansion of HEARTS are examined: medicines, team-based care, and a system for monitoring and evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Thus far, 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have committed to integrating this program across their primary healthcare network by 2025. The increase in hypertension coverage and control in primary health care settings compared with the traditional model is promising and confirms that the interventions under the HEARTS umbrella are feasible and acceptable to communities, patients, providers, decision-makers, and funders. This review highlights some cases of successful implementation. Scaling up effective treatment for hypertension and optimization of CVD risk management is a pragmatic way to accelerate the reduction of CVD mortality while strengthening primary healthcare systems to respond effectively, with quality, and equitably, to the challenge of non-communicable diseases, not only in low-middle income countries but in all communities globally.

[HEARTS in the Americas: targeting health system change to improve population hypertension controlHEARTS nas Américas: impulsionar mudanças no sistema de saúde para melhorar o controle da hipertensão arterial na população]

Purpose of review

HEARTS in the Americas is the regional adaptation of Global Hearts, the World Health Organization initiative for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention and control. Its overarching goal is to drive health services to change managerial and clinical practice in primary care settings to improve hypertension control and CVD risk management. This review describes the HEARTS in the Americas initiative. First, the regional epidemiological situation of CVD mortality and population hypertension control trends are summarized; then the rationale for its main intervention components: the primary care-oriented management system and the HEARTS Clinical Pathway are described. Finally, the key factors for accelerating the expansion of HEARTS are examined: medicines, team-based care, and a system for monitoring and evaluation.

Recent findings

Thus far, 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have committed to integrating this program across their primary healthcare network by 2025. The increase in hypertension coverage and control in primary health care settings compared with the traditional model is promising and confirms that the interventions under the HEARTS umbrella are feasible and acceptable to communities, patients, providers, decision-makers, and funders. This review highlights some cases of successful implementation.

Summary

Scaling up effective treatment for hypertension and optimization of CVD risk management is a pragmatic way to accelerate the reduction of CVD mortality while strengthening primary healthcare systems to respond effectively, with quality, and equitably, to the challenge of non-communicable diseases, not only in low-middle income countries but in all communities globally.

Preventing cognitive decline by reducing BP target (PCOT): A randomized, pragmatic, multi-health systems clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence suggests that intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (BP) may prevent mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. However, current guidelines provide inconsistent recommendations regarding optimal BP targets, citing safety concerns of excessive BP lowering in the diverse population of older adults. We are conducting a pragmatic trial to determine if an implementation strategy to reduce systolic BP to <130 and diastolic BP to <80 mmHg will safely slow cognitive decline in older adults with hypertension when compared to patients receiving usual care.

METHODS

The Preventing Cognitive Decline by Reducing BP Target Trial (PCOT) is an embedded randomized pragmatic clinical trial in 4000 patients from two diverse health-systems who are age ≥ 70 years with BP >130/80 mmHg. Participants are randomized to the intervention arm or usual care using a permuted block randomization within each health system. The intervention is a combination of team-based care with clinical decision support to lower home BP to <130/80 mmHg. The primary outcome is cognitive decline as determined by the change in the modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-m) scores from baseline. As a secondary outcome, patients who decline ≥3 points on the TICS-m will complete additional cognitive assessments and this information will be reviewed by an expert panel to determine if they meet criteria for MCI or dementia.

CONCLUSION

The PCOT trial will address the effectiveness and safety of hypertension treatment in two large health systems to lower BP targets to reduce risk of cognitive decline in real-world settings.

Biomarkers to Guide Medical Therapy in Primary Aldosteronism

Primary aldosteronism (PA) is an endocrinopathy characterized by dysregulated aldosterone production that occurs despite suppression of renin and angiotensin II, and that is non-suppressible by volume and sodium loading. The effectiveness of surgical adrenalectomy for patients with lateralizing PA is characterized by the attenuation of excess aldosterone production leading to blood pressure reduction, correction of hypokalemia, and increases in renin-biomarkers that collectively indicate a reversal of PA pathophysiology and restoration of normal physiology. Even though the vast majority of patients with PA will ultimately be treated medically rather than surgically, there is a lack of guidance on how to optimize medical therapy and on key metrics of success. Herein, we review the evidence justifying approaches to medical management of PA and biomarkers that reflect endocrine principles of restoring normal physiology. We review the current arsenal of medical therapies, including dietary sodium restriction, steroidal and nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, epithelial sodium channel inhibitors, and aldosterone synthase inhibitors. It is crucial that clinicians recognize that multimodal medical treatment for PA can be highly effective at reducing the risk for adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes when titrated with intention. The key biomarkers reflective of optimized medical therapy are unsurprisingly similar to the physiologic expectations following surgical adrenalectomy: control of blood pressure with the fewest number of antihypertensive agents, normalization of serum potassium without supplementation, and a rise in renin. Pragmatic approaches to achieve these objectives while mitigating adverse effects are reviewed.

Advances in the management of chronic kidney disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a global public health crisis, but awareness by patients and providers is poor. Defined as persistent abnormalities in kidney structure or function for more than three months, manifested as either low glomerular filtration rate or presence of a marker of kidney damage such as albuminuria, CKD can be identified through readily available blood and urine tests. Early recognition of CKD is crucial for harnessing major advances in staging, prognosis, and treatment. This review discusses the evidence behind the general principles of CKD management, such as blood pressure and glucose control, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade, statin therapy, and dietary management. It additionally describes individualized approaches to treatment based on risk of kidney failure and cause of CKD. Finally, it reviews novel classes of kidney protective agents including sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, non-steroidal selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and endothelin receptor antagonists. Appropriate, widespread implementation of these highly effective therapies should improve the lives of people with CKD and decrease the worldwide incidence of kidney failure.

Diagnosis of cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic kidney disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cardiovascular death. Identifying and monitoring cardiovascular complications and hypertension is important for managing patients with CKD or kidney failure and transplant recipients. Biomarkers of myocardial ischaemia, such as troponins and electrocardiography (ECG), have limited utility for diagnosing cardiac ischaemia in patients with advanced CKD. Dobutamine stress echocardiography, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy and dipyridamole stress testing can be used to detect coronary disease in these patients. Left ventricular hypertrophy and left ventricular dysfunction can be detected and monitored using various techniques with differing complexity and cost, including ECG, echocardiography, nuclear magnetic resonance, CT and myocardial scintigraphy. Atrial fibrillation and other major arrhythmias are common in all stages of CKD, and ambulatory heart rhythm monitoring enables precise time profiling of these disorders. Screening for cerebrovascular disease is only indicated in asymptomatic patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Standardized blood pressure is recommended for hypertension diagnosis and treatment monitoring and can be complemented by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Judicious use of these diagnostic techniques may assist clinicians in detecting the whole range of cardiovascular alterations in patients with CKD and enable timely treatment of CVD in this high-risk population.

Blood pressure targets in chronic kidney disease: still no consensus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite a strong consensus that treatment of hypertension is fundamental to strategies seeking to slow chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression and reduce the associated risk of cardiovascular events (CVE), controversy persists regarding optimal blood pressure (BP) targets. This article reviews the evidence for different targets, discusses associated controversies and suggests approaches to improve BP control.

RECENT FINDINGS

Landmark clinical trials established the principle that lower BP targets are associated with slower progression of CKD in people with a greater magnitude of proteinuria and previous guidelines recommended a target BP of <130/80 mmHg for those with proteinuria. However, the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial provided new evidence that a systolic BP target of <120 mmHg was associated with a reduced risk of CVE, though there was no impact on CKD progression and there was concern about an increase in renal adverse events. Nevertheless, 2021 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines recommended systolic BP <120 mmHg, though other updated guidelines did not follow this trend. All guidelines emphasise the importance of standardised BP measurement and a personalised approach.

SUMMARY

An individualised and shared decision-making approach to BP target setting and management is recommended, guided by standardised BP measurement.

Utility of standing office blood pressure in detecting hypertension in healthy adults

Current guidelines recommend office blood pressures (BP) be taken in a seated position when screening for hypertension (HTN). Seated BP is known to have limited accuracy in detecting high BP, while the utility of standing BP in diagnosing HTN is unknown. We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine the incremental value of standing BP in diagnosing HTN. Seated, standing, and 24-h ambulatory BPs (ABPM) were obtained in adults without known cardiovascular disease, HTN, or BP medication use. Presence of HTN was defined by the 2017 ACC/AHA and the 2023 ESH HTN guidelines based on ABPM. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of seated and standing BP. Sensitivity and specificity of standing BP was determined using cut-offs derived from Youden's Index, while sensitivity and specificity of seated BP was determined using the cut-off of 130/80 mmHg and by 140/90 mmHg. Among 125 participants (mean age 49 ± 17 years; 62% female; 24% Black), 33.6% of them had HTN. Sensitivity and specificity of seated systolic BP (SBP) was 43% and 92%, respectively. Cut-offs selected by Youden's index for standing SBP/diastolic BP (DBP) were 124/81 mmHg according to the 2017 ACC/AHA HTN guidelines, and 123.5/83.5 mmHg according to the 2023 ESH HTN guidelines. Sensitivity and specificity of standing SBP was 71% and 67%, respectively. The AUROC of standing SBP (0.81 [0.71-0.92]) was significantly higher than seated SBP (0.70 [0.49-0.91]), when HTN was defined as average 24-h SBP ≥ 125 mmHg. Moreover, the addition of standing to seated SBP (0.80 [0.68-0.92]) improved HTN detection when compared to seated SBP. These patterns were consistent for both the 2017 ACC/AHA and the 2023 ESH definitions for HTN. In summary, standing BP, alone or in combination with seated BP, outperformed seated BP alone in diagnosing HTN in adults.

Editors' Commentary on the 2023 ESH Management of Arterial Hypertension Guidelines

Clinical practice guidelines are ideally suited to the provision of advice on the prevention, diagnosis, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure (BP). The recently published European Society of Hypertension (ESH) 2023 ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension is the latest in a long series of high BP clinical practice guidelines. It closely resembles the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/ESH guidelines, with incremental rather than major changes. Although the ESH guidelines are primarily written for European clinicians and public health workers, there is a high degree of concordance between its recommendations and those in the other major BP guidelines. Despite the large number of national and international BP guidelines around the world, general population surveys demonstrate that BP guidelines are not being well implemented in any part of the world. The level of BP, which is the basis for diagnosis and management, continues to be poorly measured in routine clinical practice and control of hypertension remains suboptimal, even to a conservative BP target such as a systolic/diastolic BP <140/90 mm Hg. BP guidelines need to focus much more on implementation of recommendations for accurate diagnosis and strategies for improved control in those being treated for hypertension. An evolving body of implementation science can assist in meeting this goal. Given the enormous health, social, and financial burden of high BP, better diagnosis and management should be an imperative for clinicians, government, and others responsible for the provision of health care services. Hopefully, the 2023 ESH will help enable this.