Impact of seasonal blood pressure changes on visit-to-visit blood pressure variability and related cardiovascular outcomes

BACKGROUND

Visit-to-visit blood pressure (BP) variability associates with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. We investigated the role of seasonal BP modifications on the magnitude of BP variability and its impact on cardiovascular risk.

METHODS

In 25 390 patients included in the ONTARGET and TRANSCEND trials, the on-treatment systolic (S) BP values obtained by five visits during the first two years of the trials were grouped according to the month in which they were obtained. SBP differences between winter and summer months were calculated for BP variability quintiles (Qs), as quantified by the coefficient of variation (CV) of on-treatment mean SBP from the five visits. The relationship of BP variability with the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality was assessed by the Cox regression model.

RESULTS

SBP was approximately 4 mmHg lower in summer than in winter regardless of confounders. Winter/summer SBP differences contributed significantly to each SBP-CV quintile. Increase of SBP-CV from Q1 to Q5 was associated with a progressive increase in the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of the primary endpoint of the trials, i.e. morbid and fatal cardiovascular events. This association was even stronger after removal of the effect of seasonality from the calculation of SBP-CV. A similar trend was observed for secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Winter/summer SBP differences significantly contribute to visit-to-visit BP variability. However, this contribution does not participate in the adverse prognostic significance of visit-to-visit BP variations, which seems to be more evident after removal of the BP effects of seasonality from visit-to-visit BP variations.

The lowest well tolerated blood pressure: A personalized target for all?

The optimal blood pressure (BP) target for prevention of cardiovascular complications of hypertension remains uncertain. Most Guidelines suggest different targets depending on age, comorbidities and treatment tolerability, but the underlying evidence is not strong. Results of randomized strategy trials comparing lower (i.e., more intensive) versus higher (i.e., less intensive) BP targets should drive the definition. However, these trials tested different BP targets based on systolic BP, diastolic BP or combined systolic and diastolic BP goals. Overall, the more intensive treatment targets reduced the risk of major cardiovascular complications of hypertension when compared with the less intensive targets, despite a higher incidence of unwanted effects including, but not limited to, hypotension, electrolyte abnormalities and renal dysfunction. Consequently, some Guidelines defined low BP thresholds (i.e., 120/70 mmHg) not to exceed downward because of the expectation that unwanted effects may outweigh the outcome benefits. The present review discusses the evidence underlying the choice of BP targets, which remains an important step in the management of hypertensive patients. We conclude that, on the ground of the heterogeneity of available data in support to fixed BP targets, their definition should be personalized in all patients and based on best trade-off between efficacy and safety, i.e., the lowest well tolerated BP.

Rationale of treatment recommendations in the 2023 ESH hypertension guidelines

No abstract available.

Perspectives on improving blood pressure control to reduce the clinical and economic burden of hypertension

The clinical and economic burden of hypertension is high and continues to increase globally. Uncontrolled hypertension has severe but avoidable long-term consequences, including cardiovascular diseases, which are among the most burdensome and most preventable conditions in Europe. Yet, despite clear guidelines on screening, diagnosis and management of hypertension, a large proportion of patients remain undiagnosed or undertreated. Low adherence and persistence are common, exacerbating the issue of poor blood pressure (BP) control. Although current guidelines provide clear direction, implementation is hampered by barriers at the patient-, physician- and healthcare system levels. Underestimation of the impact of uncontrolled hypertension and limited health literacy lead to low adherence and persistence among patients, treatment inertia among physicians and a lack of decisive healthcare system action. Many options to improve BP control are available or under investigation. Patients would benefit from targeted health education, improved BP measurement, individualized treatment or simplified treatment regimens through single-pill combinations. For physicians, increasing awareness of the burden of hypertension, as well as offering training on monitoring and optimal management and provision of the necessary time to collaboratively engage with patients would be useful. Healthcare systems should establish nationwide strategies for hypertension screening and management. Furthermore, there is an unmet need to implement more comprehensive BP measurements to optimize management. In conclusion, an integrative, patient-focused, multimodal multidisciplinary approach to the management of hypertension by clinicians, payers and policymakers, involving patients, is required to achieve long-term improvements in population health and cost-efficiency for healthcare systems.

How low should blood pressure be in patients with chronic coronary and cerebrovascular diseases

Over the last three decades, there are an increasing number of investigators and meta-analyses focusing on the fact that lowering blood pressure levels below a critical point is no longer beneficial and possibly even deleterious. In recent years, several trials and meta-analyses assessing intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering found that intensive treatment and lower blood pressure levels are associated with a reduction in CV events and mortality. However, a careful examination of the results shows that current data are not easily applicable to the general hypertensive population. In addition, recommendations of different guidelines since 2017 so far suggest different BP levels regarding the systolic and diastolic thresholds to be achieved and maintained, particularly in specific clinical situations such as patients with coronary artery disease and stroke. The challenge is to better define the limits of intervention and to define phenotypes of patients who are particularly vulnerable to over-aggressive lowering of blood pressure. This article reviews the evidence, controversies and current state of knowledge regarding intensive BP lowering and the lower thresholds of BP to be achieved in patients with chronic coronary or cerebrovascular diseases.

Time in therapeutic range: timely in hypertension therapeutics?

Elevated blood pressure ranks among the most important modifiable risk factors for premature death, and disability from hypertension mediated organ damage in the world. Many studies attest to the value of lifestyle adjustments and pharmacologic therapy in improving outcomes in patients with hypertension. Since blood pressure is a dynamic vitals sign, variability in visit-to-visit measurements is expected. While guidelines recommend a goal blood pressure, increasing attention is centered on how often a patient's blood pressure is found to be not only below the recommended goal value, but also how much of the time the blood pressure is below what is considered a safe lower goal threshold for blood pressure. In this Perspective we review a relatively new technique in addressing adequacy of blood pressure treatment, the time in therapeutic range, and provide examples supporting the clinical relevance of this novel metric.

The Features of Post-infarction Period in Patients of Law Tolerance to Physical Activity and Chronic Heart Failure

Aim: To determine the features of the early post-infarction period in patients after acute coronary syndrome with concomitant arterial hypertension, depending on the response to dosed physical activity. Materials and Methods: 120 patients with a reduced response to dosed physical activity, with Q, QS MI and concomitant hypertension, who were at the stage of rehabilitation and recovery treatment, were examined. Results: In the course of the study, during the 6-minute walk test, a decrease in oxygen consumption was found in the group of patients of an adequate tolerance to physical activity by 18.42% compared to 15.21% in the group of patients of low tolerance to activity. During the analysis of ABPM (Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring) indicators, it was found that in patients who made up the group of low tolerance to DPA (Dosed Physical Activity), significantly higher average values of systolic blood pressure (SBP) (159.24}3.4) mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (96.26}2 .49) mm Hg, as well as heart rate. During urgent coronary angiography, it was found that in patients of an adequate response to DPA, one vascular lesion was detected in most cases (73.3%), in the group of patients of low tolerance to DPA, one vascular lesion of CA was detected in (14.5%), in (55.5%) recorded two vascular lesions of the CA, and (30%) patients had three or more vascular lesions of the CA. The level of troponin I in blood serum at the time of hospitalization in the group of patients of low tolerance to DPA was 36.38}6.79 ng/ml, the level of NT-proBNP – 726.4}36.32 pg/ml, the level of endothelin-1-9,37}1.34 pmol/L. Conclusions: During the recovery period of treatment of patients after an acute myocardial infarction with concomitant arterial hypertension, a low tolerance to dosed physical activity occurs (in 63.7% of cases), which is accompanied by the appearance of anginal pain, changes in clinical indicators in the early and late post-infarction period and prevents the conducting a full range of rehabilitation measures.

Prevalence, risk factors, and cardiovascular disease outcomes associated with persistent blood pressure control: The Jackson Heart Study

BACKGROUND

Maintaining blood pressure (BP) control over time may contribute to lower risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) among individuals who are taking antihypertensive medication.

METHODS

The Jackson Heart Study (JHS) enrolled 5,306 African-American adults ≥21 years of age and was used to determine the proportion of African Americans that maintain persistent BP control, identify factors associated with persistent BP control, and determine the association of persistent BP control with CVD events. This analysis included 1,604 participants who were taking antihypertensive medication at Visit 1 and had BP data at Visits 1 (2000-2004), 2 (2005-2008), and 3 (2009-2013). Persistent BP control was defined as systolic BP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <90 mm Hg at all three visits. CVD events were assessed from Visit 3 through December 31, 2016. Hazard ratios (HR) for the association of persistent BP control with CVD outcomes were adjusted for age, sex, systolic BP, smoking, diabetes, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol at Visit 3.

RESULTS

At Visit 1, 1,226 of 1,604 participants (76.4%) with hypertension had controlled BP. Overall, 48.9% of participants taking antihypertensive medication at Visit 1 had persistent BP control. After multivariable adjustment for demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, behavioral, and psychosocial factors, and access-to-care, participants were more likely to have persistent BP control if they were <65 years of age, women, had family income ≥$25,000 at each visit, and visited a health professional in the year prior to each visit. The multivariable adjusted HR (95% confidence interval) comparing participants with versus without persistent BP control was 0.71 (0.46-1.10) for CVD, 0.68 (0.34-1.34) for coronary heart disease, 0.65 (0.27-1.52) for stroke, and 0.55 (0.33-0.90) for heart failure.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of JHS participants taking antihypertensive medication had persistent BP control, putting them at increased risk for heart failure.

Clinical benefit of systolic blood pressure within the target range among patients with or without diabetes mellitus: a propensity score-matched analysis of two randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Recent guidelines recommended a systolic blood pressure (SBP) target of < 130 mmHg for patients with or without diabetes but without providing a lower bound. Our study aimed to explore whether additional clinical benefits remain at achieved blood pressure (BP) levels below the recommended target.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) among the non-diabetic population and the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes BP (ACCORD-BP) trial among diabetic subjects. We used the propensity score method to match patients from the intensive BP group to those from the standard group in each trial. Individuals with different achieved BP levels from the intensive BP group were used as "reference." For each stratum, the trial-specific primary outcome (i.e., composite outcome of myocardial infarction (MI), acute coronary syndrome not resulting in MI, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure (HF), or cardiovascular death for SPRINT; non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death for ACCORD-BP) was compared by Cox regression.

RESULTS

A non-linear association was observed between the mean achieved BP and incidence of composite cardiovascular events, regardless of treatment allocation. The significant treatment benefit for primary outcome remained at SBP 110-120 mmHg (hazard ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.46, 0.76] for SPRINT; 0.67 [0.52, 0.88] for ACCORD-BP) and SBP 120-130 mmHg for SPRINT (0.47 [0.34, 0.63]) but not for ACCORD-BP (0.93 [0.70, 1.23]). The results were similar for the secondary outcomes including all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, stroke, and HF. Intensive BP treatment benefits existed among patients maintaining a diastolic BP of 60-70 mmHg but were less distinct.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment benefit persists at as low as SBP 110-120 mmHg irrespective of diabetes status. Achieved very low BP levels appeared to increase cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality.

Daily blood pressure profile and blood-brain barrier permeability in patients with cerebral small vessel disease

Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) plays an important role in cognitive impairment, stroke, disability, and death. Hypertension is the main risk factor for CSVD. The use of antihypertensive therapy has not resulted in the expected decrease in CSVD complications, which may be related to the underestimation of significance of daily blood pressure profile for blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability. 53 patients with CSVD of varying severity (mean age 60.08 ± 6.8 years, 69.8% women, subjects with treated long-standing hypertension vs. normotensive subjects − 84.8% vs. 15.2%) and 17 healthy volunteers underwent ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and MRI, including T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for assessing BBB permeability. Most of ABPM parameters in CSVD patients did not differ from controls, but were associated with the severity of white matter hyperintensity (WMH) and the total CSVD score. BBB permeability in normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and grey matter (GM) was significantly higher in CSVD patients, and the severity of BBB permeability remained similar in patients with different stages of WMH. Among BBB permeability parameters, the area under the curve, corresponding to an increase in the contrast transit time in NAWM, had the greatest number of correlations with deviations of ABPM parameters. BBB permeability in CSVD is a universal mechanism of NAWM and GM damage associated with a slight increase in ABPM parameters. It is obvious that the treatment of hypertension in patients with not severe WMH should be more aggressive and carried out under the control of ABPM.

Do recent meta-analyses truly prove that treatment with blood pressure-lowering drugs is beneficial at any blood pressure value, no matter how low? A critical review

Current European guidelines for the management of hypertension and on cardiovascular disease prevention place the threshold for pharmacological treatment at a SBP level of 140 mmHg or above, with the exception of patients at very high risk (mainly because of coronary heart disease). This is in agreement with the current definition of hypertension, that is, the level of blood pressure at which the benefits of treatment outweigh the risks of treatment, as documented by clinical trials. This rationale and definition was recently challenged by meta-analyses using individual participant-level data from 48 randomized trials by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC). The authors calculated for a fixed 5 mmHg pharmacological reduction of SBP an overall 10% risk reduction for major cardiovascular events. It was concluded that there was no reliable evidence of heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline SBP categories; that the effect was independent from the presence of cardiovascular disease; applied also to old and very old individuals up to 84 years or beyond; and that BP-lowering was also beneficial in individuals with normal or high-normal SBP down to a baseline SBP less than 120 mmHg. In this report, we identify and discuss a number of shortcomings of the BPLTTC meta-analyses. In our view, the conclusions by the BPLTTC must be - together with accompanying suggestions to abandon the definition of hypertension - strongly rejected as they are not justified and may be harmful for cardiovascular health in individuals without hypertension.

Sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admission among Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVES

Sustaining SBP control reduces the risk for cardiovascular events that impair function but its association with nursing home admission has not been well studied.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admissions using data from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims restricted to participants with fee-for-service coverage, at least eight study visits with SBP measurements, who were not living in a nursing home during a 48-month baseline BP assessment period (n = 6557). Sustained SBP control was defined as less than 140 mmHg at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits. Nursing home admissions were identified using the Medicare Long Term Care Minimum Data Set.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 73.8 years and 44.3% were men. Over a median follow-up of 9.2 years, 844 participants (12.8%) had a nursing home admission. Rates of nursing home admission per 100 person-years were 16.3 for participants with SBP control at less than 50%, 14.1 at 50% to less than 75%, 7.8 at 75% to less than 100%, and 5.3 at 100% of visits. Compared with those with sustained SBP control at less than 50% of visits, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for nursing home admission were 0.79 (0.66-0.93), 0.70 (0.58-0.84), and 0.57 (0.44-0.74) among participants with SBP control at 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among Medicare beneficiaries in ALLHAT, sustained SBP control was associated with a lower risk of long-term nursing home admission.

Guide de Pratique Clinique. Prise en charge de l’hypertension artérielle chez l’adulte en Tunisie

Ce document a été réalisé dans le cadre d'une collaboration entre l'Instance Nationale de l’Évaluation et de l'Accréditation en Santé (INEAS), la Société Tunisienne de Cardiologie et de Chirurgie Cardiovasculaire (STCCCV) et la Caisse Nationale d’Assurance Maladie (CNAM).

Office Blood Pressure Range and Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Hypertension: A Nationwide Cohort Study in South Korea

Background

It is unclear what office blood pressure (BP) is the optimal treatment target range in patients with hypertension.

Methods and Results

Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we extracted the data on 479 359 patients with hypertension with available BP measurements and no history of cardiovascular events from 2002 to 2011. The study end point was major cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. This cohort study evaluated the association of BP levels (<120/<70, 120–129/70–79, 130–139/80–89, 140–149/90–99, and ≥150/≥100 mm Hg) with MACE. During a median follow‐up of 9 years, 55 401 MACE were documented in our cohort. The risk of MACE was the lowest (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76–0.84) at BP level of <120/<70 mm Hg, and was the highest (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.29–1.36) at ≥150/≥100 mm Hg in comparison with 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg. These results were consistent in all age groups and both sexes. Among patients treated with antihypertensive medication (n=237 592, 49.5%), in comparison with a BP level of 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg, the risk of MACE was significantly higher in patients with elevated BP (≥140/≥90 mm Hg), but not significantly lower in patients with BP of <130/<80 mm Hg. Low BP <120/70 mm Hg was associated with increased risk of all‐cause or cardiovascular death in all age groups.

Conclusions

BP level is significantly correlated with the risk of MACE in all Korean patients with hypertension. However, there were no additional benefits for MACE amongst those treated for hypertension with BP <120/70 mm Hg.

Hypertensive Crisis in Acute Cerebrovascular Diseases Presenting at the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review

Hypertensive crisis, defined as an increase in systolic blood pressure >179 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure >109 mmHg, typically causes end-organ damage; the brain is an elective and early target, among others. The strong relationship between arterial hypertension and cerebrovascular diseases is supported by extensive evidence, with hypertension being the main modifiable risk factor for both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, especially when it is uncontrolled or rapidly increasing. However, despite the large amount of data on the preventive strategies and therapeutic measures that can be adopted, the management of high BP in patients with acute cerebrovascular diseases presenting at the emergency department is still an area of debate. Overall, the outcome of stroke patients with high blood pressure values basically depends on the occurrence of hypertensive emergency or hypertensive urgency, the treatment regimen adopted, the drug dosages and their timing, and certain stroke features. In this narrative review, we provide a timely update on the current treatment, debated issues, and future directions related to hypertensive crisis in patients referred to the emergency department because of an acute cerebrovascular event. This will also focus greater attention on the management of certain stroke-related, time-dependent interventions, such as intravenous thrombolysis and mechanic thrombectomy.

Hypertensive Crisis in Acute Cerebrovascular Diseases Presenting at the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review

Hypertensive crisis, defined as an increase in systolic blood pressure >179 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure >109 mmHg, typically causes end-organ damage; the brain is an elective and early target, among others. The strong relationship between arterial hypertension and cerebrovascular diseases is supported by extensive evidence, with hypertension being the main modifiable risk factor for both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, especially when it is uncontrolled or rapidly increasing. However, despite the large amount of data on the preventive strategies and therapeutic measures that can be adopted, the management of high BP in patients with acute cerebrovascular diseases presenting at the emergency department is still an area of debate. Overall, the outcome of stroke patients with high blood pressure values basically depends on the occurrence of hypertensive emergency or hypertensive urgency, the treatment regimen adopted, the drug dosages and their timing, and certain stroke features. In this narrative review, we provide a timely update on the current treatment, debated issues, and future directions related to hypertensive crisis in patients referred to the emergency department because of an acute cerebrovascular event. This will also focus greater attention on the management of certain stroke-related, time-dependent interventions, such as intravenous thrombolysis and mechanic thrombectomy.

Cardiovascular outcomes at recommended blood pressure targets in middle-aged and elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared to all middle-aged and elderly hypertensive study patients with high cardiovascular risk

PURPOSE

Event-based clinical outcome trials have shown limited evidence to support guidelines recommendations to lower blood pressure (BP) to <130/80 mmHg in middle-aged and elderly hypertensive patients with diabetes mellitus or with general high cardiovascular (CV) risk. We addressed this issue by post-hoc analysing the risk of CV events in patients who participated in the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial and compared the hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with all high-risk hypertensive patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the proportion of on-treatment visits before the occurrence of an event (<25% to ≥75%) in which BP was reduced to <140/90 or <130/80 mmHg. Patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 5250) were compared with the entire VALUE population with high CV risk (n = 15,245).

RESULTS

After adjustments for baseline differences between groups, a reduction in the proportion of visits in which BP was reduced to <140/90 mmHg, but not to <130/80 mmHg, was accompanied by a progressive increase in the risk of CV morbidity and mortality as well as stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure in both diabetes mellitus and in all high-risk patients. Target BP <130/80 mmHg reduced stroke risk in the main population but not in the diabetes mellitus patients. Patients with diabetes mellitus had higher event rates for the primary cardiac endpoint and all-cause mortality driven by a higher rate of heart failure.

CONCLUSION

In the high-risk hypertensive patients of the VALUE trial achieving more frequently BP <140/90 mmHg, but not <130/80 mmHg, showed principally the same protective effect on overall and cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus and in the general high-risk hypertensive population.

Cardiovascular outcomes at recommended blood pressure targets in middle-aged and elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension

PURPOSE

Available data of event-based clinical outcomes trials show that little evidence supports the guidelines recommendations to lower blood pressure (BP) to <130/80 mmHg in middle-aged and elderly people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension. We addressed this issue by post-hoc analysing the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in mostly elderly high-risk hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus participating in the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients (n = 5250) were divided into 4 groups according to the proportion of on-treatment visits before the occurrence of an event (<25% to ≥ 75%) in which BP was reduced to <140/90 or <130/80 mmHg.

RESULTS

After adjustment for baseline demographic differences between groups, a reduction in the proportion of visits in which BP achieved <140/90 mmHg accompanied a progressive increase in the risk of CV mortality and morbidity as well as of cause-specific events such as stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure. A progressive reduction in the proportion of visits in which BP was reduced <130/80 mmHg did not have any effect on CV risks.

CONCLUSION

In mostly elderly high-risk hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus participating in the VALUE trial, achieving more frequently BP <140/90 mmHg showed a marked protective effect on overall and all cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes. This was not the case for a more frequent achievement of the more intensive BP target, i.e. <130/80 mmHg.

Blood pressure and long-term mortality in older patients: results of the Fiesole Misurata Follow-up Study

BACKGROUND

Optimal blood pressure (BP) control can prevent major adverse health events, but target values are still controversial, especially in older patients with comorbidities, frailty and disability.

AIMS

To evaluate mortality according to BP values in a cohort of older adults enrolled in the Fiesole Misurata Study, after a 6-year follow-up.

METHODS

Living status as of December 31, 2016 was obtained in 385 subjects participating in the Fiesole Misurata Study. Patients' characteristics were analysed to detect predictors of mortality. At baseline, all participants had undergone office BP measurement and a comprehensive geriatric assessment.

RESULTS

After a 6-year follow-up, 97 participants had died (25.2%). After adjustment for comorbidities and comprehensive geriatric assessment, mortality was significantly lower for SBP 140-159 mmHg as compared with 120-139 mmHg (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.89). This result was also confirmed in patients aged 75 + (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29-0.85), and in those with disability (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.86) or taking antihypertensive medications (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.86).

DISCUSSION

An intensive BP control may lead to greater harm than benefit in older adults. Indeed, the European guidelines recommend caution in BP lowering in older patients, especially if functionally compromised, to minimize the risk of hypotension-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

After a 6-year follow-up, mortality risk was lower in participants with SBP 140-159 mmHg as compared with SBP 120-139 mmHg, in the overall population and in the subgroups of subjects aged 75 + , with a disability or taking anti-hypertensive medications.

Are Unattended Blood Pressure Measurements Necessary in All Patients Visiting an Outpatient Cardiology Clinic?

INTRODUCTION

Unattended automatic office blood pressure (BP) measurement has given new evidence regarding treatment goals.

AIM

We aimed to explore any differences between unattended and conventional office BP measurements in different groups of patients visiting a European Society of Hypertension (ESH)  Excellence Centre.

METHODS

We performed two unattended (Microlife Watch BP Home) followed by a single attended (mercury sphygmomanometer) BP measurement in 310 patients (mean age 62 ± 15 years, 151 males, 64% hypertensives and 36% normotensive individuals) visiting our ESH Centre for a scheduled follow-up. Office BP < 140 mmHg (systolic) and < 90 mmHg (diastolic) were characterized as controlled or normal in hypertensives and normotensive individuals, respectively.

RESULTS

Attended BP (systolic/diastolic) was higher than unattended BP in total population (p < 0.001 and p = 0.02) and hypertensives (p < 0.001). In hypertensives, attended BP was higher than unattended BP regardless of age, smoking habit, obesity or controlled BP status but it was similar to unattended in diabetic patients. In normotensive individuals, attended BP was higher than unattended BP in older (p = 0.04), non-smoker (p = 0.002) and non-diabetic (p = 0.02) subjects. Finally, unattended BP was important for treatment decisions only in a small group of non-diabetic hypertensive patients (7%) whose unattended BP was controlled while attended BP was uncontrolled.

CONCLUSIONS

Unattended BP was lower than attended BP in the majority of hypertensive patients. However, it was useful only in a small percentage of non diabetic hypertensive patients in order to take appropriate treatment plan decisions.

Liraglutide reduces systolic blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

The antidiabetic effect of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus has been explored in several trials. We performed this meta-analysis determining the effects of liraglutide on blood pressure in these patients. Three electronic databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central) were searched for all published articles evaluating the effects of liraglutide on blood pressure in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Total 968 patients were included in 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with a follow-up of 16 ± 9 weeks. Liraglutide 1.8 mg/day reduced systolic blood pressure (weighted mean differences -5.39 (95% confidence interval, -7.26, -3.51) mm Hg, p < .001) and body weight (weighted mean differences -2.07 (95% confidence interval, -2.62, -1.51) kg, p < .001) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. There was no significant difference for changes of diastolic blood pressure between liraglutide 1.8 mg/day and placebo in these patients (weighted mean differences -0.53 (95% confidence interval, -1.96, 0.89) mm Hg, p > .05). The increases of heart rate were greater than placebo in patients treated with liraglutide 1.8 mg/day (weighted mean differences 6.03 (95% confidence interval, 4.78, 7.29) kg, p < .001). There was no significant correlation between reduction of systolic blood pressure and weight loss in patients treated with liraglutide 1.8 mg/day (p = .24). In conclusion, liraglutide reduces systolic blood pressure and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. These data suggest the beneficial effects of liraglutide on cardiovascular protection and may improve prognosis in these patients.

Association of Sustained Blood Pressure Control with Multimorbidity Progression Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Due to the high costs and excess mortality associated with multimorbidity, there is a need to develop approaches for delaying its progression. High blood pressure (BP) is a common chronic condition and a risk factor for many additional chronic conditions, making it an ideal target for intervention. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the association between the level of sustained BP control and the progression of multimorbidity.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 6,591 ALLHAT participants with Medicare who had systolic BP (SBP) measurements at eight or more study visits.

MEASUREMENTS

SBP control was categorized as lower than 140 mm Hg at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits. Multimorbidity progression was defined by the number of incident chronic conditions, including arthritis, asthma, atrial fibrillation, cancer, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, dementia, depression, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, osteoporosis, and stroke. Recurrent event survival analysis was used to calculate rate ratios (RRs) for the association of sustained SBP control with progression of multimorbidity.

RESULTS

Rates of incident conditions per 10 person-years (95% CIs) were 5.2 (5.1-5.4), 4.7 (4.5-4.8), 4.4 (4.2-4.5), and 4.0 (3.8-4.2) for participants with SBP control at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively, over a median follow-up of 9.0 years. Compared with participants with SBP control at less than 50% of visits, adjusted RRs (95% CIs) for multimorbidity progression were 0.90 (0.86-0.95), 0.85 (0.81-0.89), and 0.77 (0.72-0.82) for those with SBP control at 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Sustaining BP control may be an effective approach to slow multimorbidity progression and may reduce the population burden of multimorbidity.

Arterial hypertension in adults. Clinical guidelines 2020

Arterial hypertension in adults. Clinical guidelines 2020

Early cardiovascular protection by initial two-drug fixed-dose combination treatment vs. monotherapy in hypertension

Aims

Guidelines support use of drug combinations in most hypertensive patients, and recently treatment initiation with two drugs has been also recommended. However, limited evidence is available on whether this leads to greater cardiovascular (CV) protection compared to initial monotherapy.

Methods and results

Using the healthcare utilization database of the Lombardy Region (Italy), the 44 534 residents of the region (age 40-80 years) who in 2010 started treatment with one antihypertensive drug (n = 37 078) or a two-drug fixed-dose combination (FDC, n = 7456) were followed for 1 year after treatment initiation to compare the risk of hospitalization for CV disease associated with the two treatment strategies. To limit the confounding associated with non-randomized between-group comparisons, data were also analysed by: (i) matching the two groups by the high-dimensional propensity score (HDPS) and (ii) comparing, in patients experiencing one or more CV events (n = 2212), the CV event incidence during subperiods in which patients were prescribed mono- or FDC therapy (self-controlled case series design). Compared to initial monotherapy, patients on initial FDC therapy showed a reduced 1 year risk of hospitalization for any CV event (-21%, P < 0.01). This was the case also when groups were compared according to the HDPS analysis (-15%, P < 0.05). Finally, in patients experiencing CV events, the event incidence was much less when, during the 1 year follow-up, they were under FDC therapy than under monotherapy (-56%, P < 0.01). The reduced risk of hospitalization was always significant for ischaemic heart disease and new onset atrial fibrillation, and included hospitalization for cerebrovascular disease and heart failure when monotherapy and FDC therapy were compared within patients.

Conclusion

In a real-life setting, a comparison of the incidence of early CV events during antihypertensive monotherapy and FDC shows that the latter strategy leads to a more effective CV protection. This scores in favour of a two-drug FDC strategy as first step in the hypertensive population.

Association Between Early Hypertension Control and Cardiovascular Disease Incidence in Veterans With Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for hypertension treatment in patients with diabetes diverge regarding the systolic blood pressure (SBP) threshold at which treatment should be initiated and treatment goal. We examined associations of early SBP treatment with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events in U.S. adults with diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We studied 43,986 patients with diabetes who newly initiated antihypertensive therapy between 2002 and 2007. Patients were classified into categories based on SBP at treatment initiation (130-139 or ≥140 mmHg) and after 2 years of treatment (100-119, 120-129, 130-139, 140-159, and ≥160 mmHg). The primary outcome was composite ASCVD events (fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke), estimated using inverse probability of treatment-weighted Poisson regression and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Relative to individuals who initiated treatment when SBP was 130-139 mmHg, those with pretreatment SBP ≥140 mmHg had higher ASCVD risk (hazard ratio 1.10 [95% CI 1.02, 1.19]). Relative to those with pretreatment SBP of 130-139 mmHg and on-treatment SBP of 120-129 mmHg (reference group), ASCVD incidence was higher in those with pretreatment SBP ≥140 mmHg and on-treatment SBP 120-129 mmHg (adjusted incidence rate difference [IRD] 1.0 [-0.2 to 2.1] events/1,000 person-years) and in those who achieved on-treatment SBP 130-139 mmHg (IRD 1.9 [0.6, 3.2] and 1.1 [0.04, 2.2] events/1,000 person-years for those with pretreatment SBP 130-139 mmHg and ≥140 mmHg, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study, patients with diabetes initiating antihypertensive therapy when SBP was 130-139 mmHg and those achieving on-treatment SBP <130 mmHg had better outcomes than those with higher SBP levels when initiating or after 2 years on treatment.

Optimal Target Blood Pressure and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Low-Risk Younger Hypertensive Patients

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine longitudinal associations between blood pressure (BP) categories and incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) in treated hypertensive patients without CVD.

METHODS

A cohort study was performed in Korean adults who underwent a comprehensive health examination from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2016 and was followed for incident CVD via linkage to the Health Insurance and Review Agency database until the end of 2016, with a median follow-up of 4.3 years.

RESULTS

Among 263,532 participants, 8,418 treated hypertensive patients free of CVD at baseline were included. The incident CVD end point was defined as new hospitalization for CVD, including ischemic heart disease, stroke, and transient ischemic attack. During 32,975.6 person-years of follow-up, 200 participants developed new-onset CVD (incidence rate of 60.6 per 104 person-years). The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio (HR; 95% confidence intervals [CI]) for CVD according to systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels (comparing SBP < 110, SBP = 120-129, SBP = 130-139, SBP = 140-149, SBP = 150-159, and SBP ≥160 to SBP 110-119 mm Hg [reference]) were 0.83 (0.53-1.30), 1.31 (0.91-1.89), 1.18 (0.74-1.87), 1.46 (0.79-2.72), 3.19 (1.25-8.12), and 5.60 (2.00-15.70), respectively. In multivariable analysis for CVD according to diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels, HR (95% CI) of DBP < 60, DBP = 70-79, DBP = 80-89, DBP = 90-99, and DBP ≥100 compared to DBP = 60-69 mm Hg [reference]) were 0.51 (0.12-2.14), 1.13 (0.76-1.67), 1.26 (0.83-1.92), 1.62 (0.89-2.97), and 1.68 (0.51-5.55), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cohort of middle-aged treated hypertensive patients, SBP < 120 mm Hg and/or DBP < 70 mm Hg were acceptable and showed a trend of protection of incident CVD.

2018 Korean society of hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension: part III-hypertension in special situations

Treatment of hypertension improves cardiovascular, renal, and cerebrovascular outcomes. However, the benefit of treatment may be different according to the patients’ characteristics. Additionally, the target blood pressure or initial drug choice should be customized according to the special conditions of the hypertensive patients. In this part III, we reviewed previous data and presented recommendations for some special populations such as diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, elderly people, and cardio-cerebrovascular disease.

Age-specific associations between systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify the following in all age groups among individuals without known hypertension and CVD: (1) Whether a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 130-139 mm Hg elevates cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. (2) Whether SBP shows a linear association with cause-specific CVD mortality.

METHODS

We used the Korean National Health Insurance sample data (n=429 220). Participants were categorised into three groups by age (40-59 years, 60-69 years and 70-80 years).

RESULTS

During 10.4 years of follow-up, 4319 cardiovascular deaths occurred. A positive and graded association was generally observed between SBP and overall and cause-specific CVD mortality regardless of age, except for ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality in those aged 70-80 years. Among those aged 70-80 years, the HRs (95% CIs) for overall CVD mortality were 1.08 (0.92-1.28), 1.14 (0.97-1.34) and 1.34 (1.14-1.58) for SBP values of 120-129 mm Hg, 130-139 mm Hg and 140-149 mm Hg, respectively, compared with SBP <120 mm Hg. For total stroke mortality, the corresponding HRs were 1.29 (1.02-1.64), 1.37 (1.09-1.72) and 1.52 (1.20-1.93), while for IHD mortality, the corresponding HRs were 0.90 (0.64-1.26), 0.86 (0.62-1.19) and 1.29 (0.93-1.78), respectively. Non-linear associations were significant for IHD.

CONCLUSIONS

In the elderly Korean population, SBPs of 130-139 mm Hg elevated total stroke mortality, but not IHD mortality, compared with normal blood pressure, and a linear association was not observed for IHD mortality in the range <140 mm Hg.

Sustained blood pressure control and coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and mortality: An observational analysis of ALLHAT

Achieving blood pressure (BP) control is associated with lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, but less is known about CVD risk associated with sustained BP control over time. This observational analysis of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was restricted to participants with four to seven visits with systolic BP (SBP) measurements during a 22-month period (n = 24 309). The authors categorized participants as having sustained BP control (SBP < 140 mm Hg) at 100%, 75% to <100%, 50% to <75%, and <50% of visits during this period. Outcomes included fatal coronary heart disease (CHD)/nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), a composite CVD outcome (fatal CHD/nonfatal MI, stroke, or HF), and mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) for the association of category of sustained BP control for each outcome were obtained using proportional hazards models. SBP control was present among 20.0% of participants at 100%, 16.4% at 75% to less than 100%, 27.0% at 50% to less than 75%, and 36.6% at less than 50% of visits. Compared to those with SBP control at 100% visits, adjusted HR (95% CI) among those with SBP control at <50% of visits was 1.16 (0.93-1.44) for fatal CHD/nonfatal MI, 1.71 (1.26-2.32) for stroke, 1.63 (1.30-2.06) for HF, 1.39 (1.20-1.62) for the composite CVD outcome, and 1.14 (0.99-1.30) for mortality. Sustained SBP control may be beneficial for preventing stroke, HF, and CVD outcomes in adults taking antihypertensive medication.

New Guidelines on Management of Arterial Hypertension: Key Similarities and Differences

Steady increase in worldwide prevalence of hypertension and hypertension-related cardiovascular morbidity and mortality necessitate new approaches to the management of hypertensive patients. It`s important to recognize that despite several differences the convergence of the 2017 ACC/AHA (US) and 2018 ESC/ESH (European) guidelines is greater now than ever before. The present review focuses on the key similarities and differences of these two documents. Among similarities we analyzed positions regarding the importance of cardiovascular risk evaluation for treatment initiation and choice of optimal treatment strategy: blood pressure (BP) treatment thresholds; drugs of choice for the initiation of antihypertensive therapy and treatment targets in different groups including elderly patients. Among key differences we analyzed sections concerning the classification of BP levels and target BP levels in patients with chronic kidney disease. In conclusion, we may say that in many ways the guidelines are just a different interpretation of the same data. There is no doubt in the importance of lowering high BP and evaluation and correction of high cardiovascular risk. One of the main purposes is to focus attention on younger patients with hypertension.

Regular consumption of green tea improves pulse pressure and induces regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients

This study characterized the effects of regular green tea (GT) and hot water (HW) ingestion on systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), pulse pressure (PP), and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in two equal, sex- and age-matched groups; Grp1 and Grp2 (n = 100 each; age 53 ± 4 years) of hypertensive patients. Grp1 had regular GT treatment, followed by HW ingestion, whereas Grp2 had HW ingestion followed by GT treatment for periods of 4 months each. Electrocardiographic (ECG) and echocardiographic assessments of LVH were made before and at the end of both periods. SBP was lowered significantly by 6.6%; DBP by 5.1%, and PP by 9.1% by the end of month 4 of GT treatment in Grp1. Upon GT cessation and HW ingestion, SBP, DBP, and PP returned to pretreatment levels over 4 months. In Grp2, SBP, DBP, and PP were reduced insignificantly by 1.5%, 1.0%, and 2.3% by the end of the 4th month of HW ingestion. Conversely, over 4 months of GT treatment, SBP, DBP, and PP were significantly lowered by 5.4%, 4.1%, and 7.7% from the baseline values, respectively. ECG and echocardiographic evidence of LVH was shown in 20% of Grp1 and 24% of Grp2 patients before intervention. This was significantly lowered to 8% and 10% in Grp1 and Grp2 by GT treatment. However, this increased to 16% following HW ingestion in Grp1. HW ingestion did mot induce regression of LVH in Grp2. Thus, regular GT ingestion has cardiovascular protective effects.

[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.

2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension

: Document reviewers: Guy De Backer (ESC Review Co-ordinator) (Belgium), Anthony M. Heagerty (ESH Review Co-ordinator) (UK), Stefan Agewall (Norway), Murielle Bochud (Switzerland), Claudio Borghi (Italy), Pierre Boutouyrie (France), Jana Brguljan (Slovenia), Héctor Bueno (Spain), Enrico G. Caiani (Italy), Bo Carlberg (Sweden), Neil Chapman (UK), Renata Cifkova (Czech Republic), John G. F. Cleland (UK), Jean-Philippe Collet (France), Ioan Mircea Coman (Romania), Peter W. de Leeuw (The Netherlands), Victoria Delgado (The Netherlands), Paul Dendale (Belgium), Hans-Christoph Diener (Germany), Maria Dorobantu (Romania), Robert Fagard (Belgium), Csaba Farsang (Hungary), Marc Ferrini (France), Ian M. Graham (Ireland), Guido Grassi (Italy), Hermann Haller (Germany), F. D. Richard Hobbs (UK), Bojan Jelakovic (Croatia), Catriona Jennings (UK), Hugo A. Katus (Germany), Abraham A. Kroon (The Netherlands), Christophe Leclercq (France), Dragan Lovic (Serbia), Empar Lurbe (Spain), Athanasios J. Manolis (Greece), Theresa A. McDonagh (UK), Franz Messerli (Switzerland), Maria Lorenza Muiesan (Italy), Uwe Nixdorff (Germany), Michael Hecht Olsen (Denmark), Gianfranco Parati (Italy), Joep Perk (Sweden), Massimo Francesco Piepoli (Italy), Jorge Polonia (Portugal), Piotr Ponikowski (Poland), Dimitrios J. Richter (Greece), Stefano F. Rimoldi (Switzerland), Marco Roffi (Switzerland), Naveed Sattar (UK), Petar M. Seferovic (Serbia), Iain A. Simpson (UK), Miguel Sousa-Uva (Portugal), Alice V. Stanton (Ireland), Philippe van de Borne (Belgium), Panos Vardas (Greece), Massimo Volpe (Italy), Sven Wassmann (Germany), Stephan Windecker (Switzerland), Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain).The disclosure forms of all experts involved in the development of these Guidelines are available on the ESC website www.escardio.org/guidelines.

Blood pressure control and impact on cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A critical analysis of the literature

High blood pressure in individuals with type2 diabetes mellitus increases the risk of cardiovascular events. The international management guidelines recommend starting pharmacological treatment with blood pressure values >140/90mmHg. However, there is no optimal cut-off point from which cardiovascular events can be reduced without causing adverse events. A blood pressure range of >130/80 to <140/90mmHg seems to be adequate. These values can be achieved through non-pharmacological (diet, exercise) and pharmacological interventions (using drugs that have been shown to reduce cardiovascular events). The choice of one or several drugs must be individualised, according to factors including, ethnicity, age, and associated comorbidities, among others.

Control of Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

High blood pressure in patients with diabetes mellitus results in a significant increase in the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. The current evidence regarding the impact of intervention on blood pressure levels (in accordance with a specific threshold) is not particularly robust. Blood pressure control is more difficult to achieve in patients with diabetes than in non-diabetic patients, and requires using combination therapy in most patients. Different management guidelines recommend initiating pharmacological therapy with values >140/90 mm/Hg; however, an optimal cut point for this population has not been established. Based on the available evidence, it appears that blood pressure targets will probably have to be lower than <140/90mmHg, and that values approaching 130/80mmHg should be recommended. Initial treatment of hypertension in diabetes should include drug classes demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular events; i.e., angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, diuretics, or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers. The start of therapy must be individualized in accordance with the patient's baseline characteristics, and factors such as associated comorbidities, race, and age, inter alia.

Leflunomide counter akt s cardiac hypertrophy

Cardiac hypertrophy (CH) is a major independent risk factor for heart failure and mortality. However, therapeutic interventions that target hypertrophy signaling in a load-independent way are unavailable. In a recent issue of Clinical Science (vol. 132, issue 6, 685-699), Ma et al. describe that the anti-inflammatory drug leflunomide markedly antagonized CH, dysfunction, and fibrosis induced by aortic banding or angiotensin-II in mice or by agonists in cultured cells. Unexpectedly, this occurred not via anti-inflammatory mechanisms but rather via inhibtion of Akt (protein kinase B, PKB) signaling. We further discuss the mechanisms underlying Akt activation and its effects on CH and review possible mechanisms of leflunomide effects. Despite some caveats, the availability of such a newly repurposed compound to treat CH can be a relevant advance.

Efficacy and Safety of S-Amlodipine 2.5 and 5 mg/d in Hypertensive Patients Who Were Treatment-Naive or Previously Received Antihypertensive Monotherapy

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S-amlodipine 2.5 and 5 mg/d in patients with hypertension who were treatment-naive or previously received antihypertensive monotherapy. During the 8-week treatment period, all patients received S-amlodipine 2.5 mg/d for the first 4 weeks, followed by S-amlodipine 5 mg/d for the second 4 weeks. For efficacy assessments, ambulatory and office blood pressure (BP) measurements were performed during the baseline, fourth-week, and eighth-week visits. For safety assessments, all adverse events and abnormal laboratory findings were recorded. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03038451). Of 43 patients evaluated at the screening visit, 33 were enrolled. In the treatment-naive arm, significant reductions in both office and ambulatory systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were observed with S-amlodipine 2.5 mg/d and additional significant reductions were achieved with dose titration (S-amlodipine 5 mg/d). At the end of the study, the rate of the treatment-naive patients with BP under control (SBP/DBP <140/90 mm Hg) was 53% with S-amlodipine 2.5 mg and increased to 78% with S-amlodipine 5 mg. For the noninferiority evaluation, S-amlodipine 2.5 and 5 mg/d treatments were generally noninferior to both office and ambulatory BP levels achieved with the medications that the patients received before participating in the study. Five nonserious adverse events likely to be associated with the study drug were observed. No serious adverse event was encountered. Consequently, S-amlodipine can be suggested as an effective and safe treatment option for patients with hypertension.

Blood pressure targets in type 2 diabetes. Evidence against or in favour of an aggressive approach

When associated with high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes mellitus is characterised by a high risk of adverse cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes. However, both can be effectively reduced by antihypertensive treatment. Current guidelines on the treatment of hypertension emphasize the need to effectively treat high blood pressure in diabetic individuals, but their recommendations differ in terms of the optimal target blood pressure value to aim for in order to maximise CV and renal protection. In some guidelines the recommended target blood pressure values are <140/90 mmHg (systolic/diastolic), whereas in others, blood pressure values close or even less than 130/80 mmHg are recommended. This paper will discuss the evidence for and against a conservative or more aggressive blood pressure target for treated diabetic hypertensive individuals based on the evidence provided by randomised trials, trial meta-analyses and large observational studies. Based on the available evidence, it appears that blood pressure targets will probably have to be lower than <140/90 mmHg, and that values approaching 130/80 mmHg should be recommended. However, evidence in favour of even lower systolic values, i.e. <130 mmHg, is limited and is definitively against a reduction to <120 mmHg.

Considerations for Optimal Blood Pressure Goals in the Elderly Population: A Review of Emergent Evidence

Recent hypertension clinical trials and national guideline updates have created a debate on the most appropriate treatment goals in elderly patients with hypertension. In 2014, recommendations by the Eighth Joint National Committee allowed a more lenient goal for patients 60 years and older compared with previous guidelines. Since then, several large clinical trials and meta-analyses have added more information regarding strict versus lenient treatment goals. Most recently, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Task Force published their highly anticipated hypertension guideline developed in conjunction with nine additional interdisciplinary organizations. This review discusses the culmination of emerging data to provide more insight into the treatment of hypertension in the elderly. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, the Cochrane database, and by hand-searching references from relevant articles. The following key terms were used: hypertension, blood pressure, systolic, and elderly. Available literature suggests that it is reasonable to target an office systolic blood pressure of less than 130 mm Hg in elderly patients with hypertension. An individualized approach is reasonable for those who are institutionalized, with high comorbidity burden, or have a short life expectancy. A diastolic blood pressure of less than 60 mm Hg should be avoided due to the potential for an increase in cardiovascular risk. The method of blood pressure measurement is extremely important to consider when determining the blood pressure goal, and proper procedures for accurate blood pressure measurement must be followed. Other factors important to consider may include the patient's comorbidities, frailty, as well as the patient's potential for adverse drug reactions.