Hypertension Guidelines

Benefits of more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure control. Updated trial sequential analysis

Outcome data from randomized trials which compared different blood pressure (BP) targets grew impressively after publication of recent trials. We conducted a cumulative updated trial sequential analysis of studies which compared a more versus less intensive BP control strategy, for a total of 60,870 randomized patients. The compared BP targets differed across the trials. Outcome measures were stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. The average duration of follow-up was 3.95 years and achieved systolic BP was 7.69 mmHg lower with the more intensive than the less intensive BP control strategy. The more intensive BP control strategy significantly reduced the risk of stroke (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.67-0.93), heart failure (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55-0.96), myocardial infarction (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73-0.91) and cardiovascular death (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.68-0.98) as compared to the less intensive strategy. In a trial sequential analysis, the more intensive BP control strategy provided conclusive benefits over the less intensive strategy on the risk of stroke, heart failure and myocardial infarction by definitely crossing the efficacy monitoring boundary. For cardiovascular death, the cumulative Z-curve of the sequential analysis touched the efficacy monitoring boundary, but did not cross it. In conclusion, data accrued from randomized trials conclusively demonstrate the superiority of a more intensive over a less intensive BP control strategy for the prevention of stroke, heart failure and myocardial infarction. Results also suggest a significant benefit, albeit not yet conclusive, of a more intensive over a less intensive strategy for prevention of cardiovascular death.

Life-threatening subclavian artery bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are rare and usually occur at the access site below the elbow. Life-threatening vascular complications during transradial PCI therapy, such as vessel perforation and dissection in the brachiocephalic, subclavian, internal mammary, and thyrocervical arteries, are rarely reported. Subclavian artery bleeding is a potentially serious complication of vascular interventional procedures leading to tracheal obstruction, hemothorax, respiratory failure, hemorrhagic shock, and death if not diagnosed early and treated promptly.

CASE SUMMARY

A male patient with typical angina pectoris underwent coronary angiography and stent implantation. During the procedure, the patient felt pharyngeal pain and tightness, which we mistook for myocardial ischemia. After PCI, swelling in the right neck and supraclavicular area was observed. The patient experienced dyspnea, emergency endotracheal intubation was performed, and then a sudden drop in blood pressure was observed. Ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans demonstrated a cervical hematoma severely compressing the trachea due to subclavian artery bleeding. Brachiocephalic angiography revealed a vascular injury site at the root of the right subclavian artery at the intersection of the right common carotid artery. A covered stent was deployed to the right subclavian artery with successful sealing of the perforation, and a bare stent was implanted in the junction of the right common carotid and brachiocephalic arteries to prevent obstruction of blood flow to the brain.

CONCLUSION

Subclavian artery bleeding is a lifethreatening complication of PCI. Early prevention, rapid recognition, and prompt treatment may improve the prognosis.

Clinical approach to the inflammatory etiology of cardiovascular diseases

Inflammation is an obligatory marker of arterial disease, both stemming from the inflammatory activity of cholesterol itself and from well-established molecular mechanisms. Raised progenitor cell recruitment after major events and clonal hematopoiesis related mechanisms have provided an improved understanding of factors regulating inflammatory phenomena. Trials with inflammation antagonists have led to an extensive evaluation of biomarkers such as the high sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP), not exerting a causative role, but frequently indicative of the individual cardiovascular (CV) risk. Aim of this review is to provide indication on the anti-inflammatory profile of agents of general use in CV prevention, i.e. affecting lipids, blood pressure, diabetes as well nutraceuticals such as n-3 fatty acids. A crucial issue in the evaluation of the benefit of the anti-inflammatory activity is the frequent discordance between a beneficial activity on a major risk factor and associated changes of hsCRP, as in the case of statins vs PCSK9 antagonists. In hypertension, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors exert an optimal anti-inflammatory activity, vs the case of sartans. The remarkable preventive activity of SLGT-2 inhibitors in heart failure is not associated with a clear anti-inflammatory mechanism. Finally, icosapent ethyl has been shown to reduce the CV risk in hypertriglyceridemia, with a 27 % reduction of hsCRP. The inflammation-based approach to arterial disease has considerably gained from an improved understanding of the clinical diagnostic strategy and from a better knowledge on the mode of action of numerous agents, including nutraceuticals.

Hypertension Guidelines: Effect of Blood Pressure Targets

There has been an abundance of hypertension guidelines over the years. Their purpose is to convey evidence-based findings from clinical trials to clinicians so that best medical choices can be made for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with hypertension. Over the past 3 years new hypertension guidelines have been published in the United States, Canada, Europe, and elsewhere with new or refined recommendations made regarding diagnosis, therapy, and intensity of treatment. Previous national guidelines were generally well aligned. However, there are major differences in the current North American and European recommendations in terms of the classification of hypertension and treatment goals, with the diagnosis of hypertension starting at 140/90 mm Hg for the European guidelines and 130/80 mm Hg for the American and Canadian guidelines. An important controversial aspect in the updated guidelines relates to a lowered threshold (130/80 mm Hg) at which hypertension is diagnosed and treated, because growing evidence indicates that individuals at low cardiovascular risk might be exposed to incremental harm because of overtreatment with antihypertensive drugs. However, these concerns need to be weighed against the robust evidence from the landmark Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) study and numerous meta-analyses, which clearly showed that intensive blood pressure-lowering aimed at a systolic blood pressure of 120-130 mm Hg causes ̴a significant, > 25% reduction in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This review highlights some of the important discrepancies between the major current guidelines, with a focus on definitions and treatment goals of hypertension. The effect of lower blood pressure targets and intensive antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular benefit and risk is also discussed.

Blood Pressure and Hispanic/Latino Cognitive Function: Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos Results

BACKGROUND

Hispanics/Latinos are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease and cognitive decline and dementias. High blood pressure (BP) has been implicated in both stroke and dementias. Associations between BP and cognition among diverse Latinos are still unpublished.

OBJECTIVE

We examined associations between cognition and four BP based measures among diverse Hispanics/Latinos. We hypothesized that higher BP, particularly systolic pressure, and increased arterial stiffness (i.e., pulse pressure), would be associated with lower cognitive function.

METHODS

We used baseline (2008-2011) Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL; n = 9,019; ages 45-74 years) data to examine cognition in relation to BP measures.

RESULTS

In age, sex, and education adjusted models, systolic, pulse, and mean arterial pressure were consistently negatively associated with executive function, psychomotor speed and sustained attention, verbal episodic learning and memory, speech fluency, and mental status measures. These associations were attenuated but remained statistically significant in fully adjusted models.

CONCLUSION

Among middle-aged and older diverse Hispanics/Latinos, we found modest but consistent associations between indicators of arterial stiffness, and compromised blood flow and lower cognitive function. Clinical management and public health interventions to raise awareness and enhance BP management beginning in midlife could reduce disparities and improve population health by reducing cognitive decline burdens.

Multiple-site bleeding at pleural adhesions and massive hemothorax following percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation: A case report

An elderly male patient with coronary heart disease underwent coronary angiography, which revealed bilateral severe coronary artery stenosis. Four stents were implanted, and at 5 h post-surgery, typical hemorrhagic shock appeared. Echocardiography verified heavy bleeding in the right thoracic cavity. Emergency angiography excluded injury or perforation of the coronary artery, aorta, right subclavian artery and brachiocephalic artery. Considering the patient's history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and severe cough during the operation, it was suspected that hemothorax was induced by a blood vessel rupture in the pleura. Video-assisted thoracic examination confirmed the tearing of pleural adhesion bands and bleeding at three sites in the pulmonary pleura and parietal pleura. According to the reported case, bleeding as a result of the laceration of pleural adhesions is an important cause of hemothorax that should be considered after exclusion of other common causes of pleural hemorrhage.

Screening for mild cognitive impairment in patients with cardiovascular risk factors

AIM

Cardiovascular risk factors are also risk factors for cognitive impairment. They have cumulative effect in target organ damage. The precise correlation between cardiovascular risk factors and cognitive impairment, as well as assessing the extent to which they may affect cognitive functioning, is difficult to ascertain in everyday clinical practice. Quick, specific, and sensitive neuropsychological tests may be useful in screening for, and the prophylaxis of, target organ damage in hypertensive patients.

METHODS

We gathered full anamnesis, performed physical examination, laboratory screening and echocardiography. These variables were observed at office and home for all patients, For half of the patients, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and neuropsychological testing using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Geriatric Depression Scale, and the 4-instrumental activities of daily living scale were undertaken.

RESULTS

For a period of 2 years, 931 patients were included after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean age was 65.90±10.00 years. Two hundred and sixty three patients (85 [32.32%] males and 178 [67.68%] females) were reevaluated after a mean follow-up period of 12 months (6-20 months). The mean results of MoCA and MMSE were significantly lower (p<0.05) in the group of patients with poorly controlled blood pressure and cardiovascular risk factors. There was mild to intermediate negative correlation between Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) and the neuropsychological tests' results.

CONCLUSION

Cardiovascular risk factors play an important role for the development of cognitive impairment in the eastern European population because of their high frequency and interaction. The use of easily applicable neuropsychological tests in everyday clinical practice of specialties other than neurology may help in stratifying the risk for development and progression of mild cognitive impairment in this high-risk group.

Drug Treatment of Hypertension: Focus on Vascular Health

Hypertension, the most common preventable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and death, is a growing health burden. Serious cardiovascular complications result from target organ damage including cerebrovascular disease, heart failure, ischaemic heart disease and renal failure. While many systems contribute to blood pressure (BP) elevation, the vascular system is particularly important because vascular dysfunction is a cause and consequence of hypertension. Hypertension is characterised by a vascular phenotype of endothelial dysfunction, arterial remodelling, vascular inflammation and increased stiffness. Antihypertensive drugs that influence vascular changes associated with high BP have greater efficacy for reducing cardiovascular risk than drugs that reduce BP, but have little or no effect on the adverse vascular phenotype. Angiotensin converting enzyme ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) improve endothelial function and prevent vascular remodelling. Calcium channel blockers also improve endothelial function, although to a lesser extent than ACEIs and ARBs. Mineralocorticoid receptor blockers improve endothelial function and reduce arterial stiffness, and have recently become more established as antihypertensive drugs. Lifestyle factors are essential in preventing the adverse vascular changes associated with high BP and reducing associated cardiovascular risk. Clinicians and scientists should incorporate these factors into treatment decisions for patients with high BP, as well as in the development of new antihypertensive drugs that promote vascular health.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Antihypertensive Medication Use and Blood Pressure Control Among US Adults With Hypertension

Background—

A key to reduce and eradicate racial disparities in hypertension outcomes is to understand their causes. We aimed at evaluating racial differences in antihypertensive drug utilization patterns and blood pressure control by insurance status, age, sex, and presence of comorbidities.

Methods and Results—

A total of 8796 hypertensive individuals ≥18 years of age were identified from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2003–2012) in a repeated cross-sectional study. During the study period, all 3 racial groups (whites, blacks, and Hispanics) experienced substantial increase in hypertension treatment and control. The overall treatment rates were 73.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.6%–76.2%), 70.8% (95% CI, 68.6%–73.0%), and 60.7% (95% CI, 57.0%–64.3%) and hypertension control rates were 42.9% (95% CI, 40.5%–45.2%), 36.9% (95% CI, 34.7%–39.2%), and 31.2% (95% CI, 28.6%–33.9%) for whites, blacks, and Hispanics, respectively. When stratified by insurance status, blacks (odds ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.64–0.86] for insured and 0.59 [95% CI, 0.36–0.94] for uninsured) and Hispanics (odds ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.60–0.91] for insured and 0.58 [95% CI, 0.36–0.94] for uninsured) persistently had lower rates of hypertension control compared with whites. Racial disparities also persisted in subgroups stratified by age (≥60 and <60 years of age) and presence of comorbidities but worsened among patients <60 years of age.

Conclusions—

Black and Hispanic patients had poorer hypertension control compared with whites, and these differences were more pronounced in younger and uninsured patients. Although black patients received more intensive antihypertensive therapy, Hispanics were undertreated. Future studies should further explore all aspects of these disparities to improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Hypertension: The role of biochemistry in the diagnosis and management

Hypertension is defined as a persistently elevated blood pressure ≥140/90mmHg. It is an important treatable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, with a high prevalence in the general population. The most common cause, essential hypertension, is a widespread disease - however, secondary hypertension is under investigated and under diagnosed. Collectively, hypertension is referred to as a "silent killer" - frequently it displays no overt symptomatology. It is a leading risk factor for death and disability globally, with >40% of persons aged over 25 having hypertension. A vast spectrum of conditions result in hypertension spanning essential through resistant, to patients with an overt endocrine cause. A significant number of patients with hypertension have multiple cardiovascular risk factors at the time of presentation. Both routine and specialised biochemical investigations are paramount for the evaluation of these patients and their subsequent management. Biochemical testing serves to identify those hypertensive individuals who are at higher risk on the basis of evidence of dysglycaemia, dyslipidaemia, renal impairment, or target organ damage and to exclude identifiable causes of hypertension. The main target of biochemical testing is the identification of patients with a specific and treatable aetiology of hypertension. Information gleaned from biochemical investigation is used to risk stratify patients and tailor the type and intensity of subsequent management and treatment. We review the approach to the biochemical investigation of patients presenting with hypertension and propose a diagnostic algorithm for work-up.

[SPRINT on clinical practice: It's time to change the management of arterial hypertension in Latin America?]

This paper analyzes the feasibility of the implementation of SPRINT trial results, the need to rethink the clinical practice guidelines(CPG) for the management of arterial hypertension and associated costs with daily practice applicability. SPRINT is a clinical trial comparing systolic blood pressure control <120mmHg and <140mmHg over cardiovascular complications, generating a great worldwide impact followed by publication of several studies that addressed relevance, usefulness, applicability and controversial aspects of SPRINT from different perspectives. Achieving blood pressure goals is one of the most discussed issue in widely used hypertension CPG around the world and in Latin American. SPRINT has generated and will generate a great impact on CPG, being necessary the reassessment of blood pressure goals and inclusion in future CPG, as has been considered in 2016 Canadian guideline and will be considered in NICE guideline update scheduled for June. The SPRINT trial raises new evidence for the management of hypertension, useful in people over 50 years, from urban populations, with defined cardiovascular risk without associated comorbidities. The applicability of SPRINT in Latin America is limited by increased costs associated with hypertensive patients' integrated health care, low care coverage, and lack of integrated care programs.

More Versus Less Intensive Blood Pressure-Lowering Strategy: Cumulative Evidence and Trial Sequential Analysis

Several randomized trials compared a more versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy on the risk of major cardiovascular events and death. Cumulative meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses can establish whether and when firm evidence favoring a specific intervention has been reached from accrued literature. Therefore, we conducted a cumulative trial sequential analysis of 18 trials that randomly allocated 53 405 patients to a more or less intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy. We sought to ascertain the extent to which trial evidence added to previously accrued data. Outcome measures were stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death. Achieved blood pressure was 7.6/4.5 mm Hg lower with the more intensive than the less intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy. For stroke and myocardial infarction, the cumulative Z curve crossed the efficacy monitoring boundary solely after the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) study, thereby providing firm evidence of superiority of a more intensive over a less intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy. For cardiovascular death and heart failure, the cumulative Z curve crossed the conventional significance boundary, but not the sequential monitoring boundary, after SPRINT. For all-cause death, the SPRINT trial pushed the cumulative Z curve away from the futility area, without reaching the conventional significance boundary. We conclude that evidence accrued to date strongly supports the superiority of a more intensive versus a less intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy for prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction. Cardiovascular death and heart failure are likely to be reduced by a more intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy, but evidence is not yet conclusive.