Evidence for the Universal Blood Pressure Goal of <130/80 mm Hg Is Strong: Controversies in Hypertension - Pro Side of the Argument

The American Heart Association at 100: A Century of Scientific Progress and the Future of Cardiovascular Science: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

In 1924, the founders of the American Heart Association (AHA) envisioned an international society focused on the heart and aimed at facilitating research, disseminating information, increasing public awareness, and developing public health policy related to heart disease. This presidential advisory provides a comprehensive review of the past century of cardiovascular and stroke science, with a focus on the AHA's contributions, as well as informed speculation about the future of cardiovascular science into the next century of the organization's history. The AHA is a leader in fundamental, translational, clinical, and population science, and it promotes the concept of the "learning health system," in which a continuous cycle of evidence-based practice leads to practice-based evidence, permitting an iterative refinement in clinical evidence and care. This advisory presents the AHA's journey over the past century from instituting professional membership to establishing extraordinary research funding programs; translating evidence to practice through clinical practice guidelines; affecting systems of care through quality programs, certification, and implementation; leading important advocacy efforts at the federal, state and local levels; and building global coalitions around cardiovascular and stroke science and public health. Recognizing an exciting potential future for science and medicine, the advisory offers a vision for even greater impact for the AHA's second century in its continued mission to be a relentless force for longer, healthier lives.

Hypertension Management in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Mini Review

Lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects over 230 million adults globally, with hypertension being one of the major risk factors for the development of PAD. Despite the high prevalence, patients with hypertension who have concomitant PAD are less likely to receive adequate therapy. Through this review, we present the current evidence underlying hypertension management in PAD, guideline-directed therapies, and areas pending further investigation. Multiple studies have shown that both high and relatively lower blood pressure levels are associated with worse health outcomes, including increased morbidity and mortality. Hence, guideline-directed recommendation involves cautious management of hypertensive patients with PAD while ensuring hypotension does not occur. Although any antihypertensive medication can be used to treat these patients, the 2017 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC), 2017 European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and 2022 Canadian guidelines favor the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) as the initial choice. Importantly, data on blood pressure targets and treatment of hypertension in PAD are limited and largely stem from sub-group studies and post-hoc analysis. Large randomized trials in patients with PAD are required in the future to delineate hypertension management in this complex patient population.

The debate over the optimal blood pressure treatment target of less than 130/80 mmHg

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to analyze the controversy regarding the optimal blood pressure (BP) target of <130/80 mmHg as proposed by the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) across all age groups. Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), stroke, and chronic kidney disease (CKD), and its optimal control is associated with lessening or preventing these complications. A recent study has argued that this BP level is universally accepted as an optimal and safe BP level. However, this argument is not accepted by other investigators, arguing that higher BP levels are as effective and safe.

METHODS

In order to investigate the current status of this level of BP control, a Medline search of the English literature was conducted between 2017 and February 2022, and 25 pertinent papers were selected.

RESULTS

The analysis of data from these studies indicates that these BP are effective in lowering the BP and preventing cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease, and they are indeed universally accepted.

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, the current proposed by the 2017 ACC/AHA treatment guidelines are effective in lowering the BP and decreasing its cardiovascular complications and should followed, till perhaps, new data come out to the contrary.

Blood pressure targets for the treatment of people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

This is the third update of the review first published in 2017. Hypertension is a prominent preventable cause of premature morbidity and mortality. People with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease are at particularly high risk, so reducing blood pressure to below standard targets may be beneficial. This strategy could reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity but could also increase adverse events. The optimal blood pressure target in people with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if lower blood pressure targets (systolic/diastolic 135/85 mmHg or less) are associated with reduction in mortality and morbidity compared with standard blood pressure targets (140 mmHg to 160mmHg/90 mmHg to 100 mmHg or less) in the treatment of people with hypertension and a history of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, angina, stroke, peripheral vascular occlusive disease).

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated review, we used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was January 2022. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with more than 50 participants per group that provided at least six months' follow-up. Trial reports had to present data for at least one primary outcome (total mortality, serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality). Eligible interventions involved lower targets for systolic/diastolic blood pressure (135/85 mmHg or less) compared with standard targets for blood pressure (140 mmHg to 160 mmHg/90 mmHg to 100 mmHg or less). Participants were adults with documented hypertension and adults receiving treatment for hypertension with a cardiovascular history for myocardial infarction, stroke, chronic peripheral vascular occlusive disease, or angina pectoris.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs that involved 9595 participants. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (range 1.0 to 4.7 years). Six of seven RCTs provided individual participant data. None of the included studies was blinded to participants or clinicians because of the need to titrate antihypertensive drugs to reach a specific blood pressure goal. However, an independent committee blinded to group allocation assessed clinical events in all trials. Hence, we assessed all trials at high risk of performance bias and low risk of detection bias. We also considered other issues, such as early termination of studies and subgroups of participants not predefined, to downgrade the certainty of the evidence. We found there is probably little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.23; 7 studies, 9595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.29; 6 studies, 9484 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Similarly, we found there may be little to no differences in serious adverse events (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.08; 7 studies, 9595 participants; low-certainty evidence) or total cardiovascular events (including myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden death, hospitalization, or death from congestive heart failure (CHF)) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 7 studies, 9595 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about withdrawals due to adverse effects. However, studies suggest more participants may withdraw due to adverse effects in the lower target group (RR 8.16, 95% CI 2.06 to 32.28; 3 studies, 801 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings were lower in the lower target group (systolic: mean difference (MD) -8.77 mmHg, 95% CI -12.82 to -4.73; 7 studies, 8657 participants; diastolic: MD -4.50 mmHg, 95% CI -6.35 to -2.65; 6 studies, 8546 participants). More drugs were needed in the lower target group (MD 0.56, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.96; 5 studies, 7910 participants), but blood pressure targets at one year were achieved more frequently in the standard target group (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.23; 7 studies, 8699 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found there is probably little to no difference in total mortality and cardiovascular mortality between people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease treated to a lower compared to a standard blood pressure target. There may also be little to no difference in serious adverse events or total cardiovascular events. This suggests that no net health benefit is derived from a lower systolic blood pressure target. We found very limited evidence on withdrawals due to adverse effects, which led to high uncertainty. At present, evidence is insufficient to justify lower blood pressure targets (135/85 mmHg or less) in people with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease. Several trials are still ongoing, which may provide an important input to this topic in the near future.

Treatment of Hypertension: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Hypertension, defined as persistent systolic blood pressure (SBP) at least 130 mm Hg or diastolic BP (DBP) at least 80 mm Hg, affects approximately 116 million adults in the US and more than 1 billion adults worldwide. Hypertension is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events (coronary heart disease, heart failure, and stroke) and death.

OBSERVATIONS

First-line therapy for hypertension is lifestyle modification, including weight loss, healthy dietary pattern that includes low sodium and high potassium intake, physical activity, and moderation or elimination of alcohol consumption. The BP-lowering effects of individual lifestyle components are partially additive and enhance the efficacy of pharmacologic therapy. The decision to initiate antihypertensive medication should be based on the level of BP and the presence of high atherosclerotic CVD risk. First-line drug therapy for hypertension consists of a thiazide or thiazidelike diuretic such as hydrochlorothiazide or chlorthalidone, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker such as enalapril or candesartan, and a calcium channel blocker such as amlodipine and should be titrated according to office and home SBP/DBP levels to achieve in most people an SBP/DBP target (&lt;130/80 mm Hg for adults &lt;65 years and SBP &lt;130 mm Hg in adults ≥65 years). Randomized clinical trials have established the efficacy of BP lowering to reduce the risk of CVD morbidity and mortality. An SBP reduction of 10 mm Hg decreases risk of CVD events by approximately 20% to 30%. Despite the benefits of BP control, only 44% of US adults with hypertension have their SBP/DBP controlled to less than 140/90 mm Hg.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Hypertension affects approximately 116 million adults in the US and more than 1 billion adults worldwide and is a leading cause of CVD morbidity and mortality. First-line therapy for hypertension is lifestyle modification, consisting of weight loss, dietary sodium reduction and potassium supplementation, healthy dietary pattern, physical activity, and limited alcohol consumption. When drug therapy is required, first-line therapies are thiazide or thiazidelike diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blockers, and calcium channel blockers.

Association of Cumulative Viral Load With the Incidence of Hypertension and Diabetes in People With HIV

BACKGROUND

HIV induces several metabolic derangements that contribute to cardiovascular disease, but it is unclear if HIV increases diabetes or hypertension risk. Refining longitudinal relationships between HIV-specific factors and cardiovascular disease risk factors across different care settings may help inform cardiovascular disease prevention among people with HIV (PWH).

METHODS

We tested the hypothesis that long-term higher cumulative viral load (viremia-copy-year) is associated with higher risk of diabetes and hypertension by analyzing electronic records of PWH from 2 distinct health systems in Chicago (Northwestern Medicine and Howard Brown Health Care) receiving care in 2004 to 2019. We used joint longitudinal-survival models to assess multivariable-adjusted associations. Subgroup analyses per site were also conducted.

RESULTS

We observed 230 (3.0%) incident diabetes cases in 7628 PWH without baseline diabetes and 496 (6.7%) hypertension cases in 7450 PWH without baseline hypertension. Pooled analysis showed a direct association of viremia-copy-year with incident hypertension (hazards ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.14-1.26]) but not with diabetes (hazards ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.96-1.10]). However, site-specific differences existed whereby the Northwestern-only analysis demonstrated a significant association of viremia-copy-year with hypertension (hazards ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.08-1.32]). Additionally, higher social deprivation index (both sites) and diagnosis of mental health disorder (Howard Brown Health only) was associated with higher diabetes and hypertension risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Cumulative viral load may be associated with incident hypertension among PWH. Associations of HIV control with cardiovascular disease risk factors among PWH may differ by health care system context.

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.

Body mass index mediates the effect of the DASH diet on hypertension: Common metabolites underlying the association

BACKGROUND

The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet is beneficial in reducing blood pressure; however, this may be a consequence of concurrent weight reduction. In the present study, we investigated whether body mass index (BMI) mediates the association between the DASH diet and hypertension and investigate common metabolic pathways.

METHODS

We included 2424 females from the cross-sectional TwinsUK cohort, with blood pressure, BMI and dietary intake measured within 1.01 (SD = 0.68) years and serum metabolomics profiling (591 metabolites). We constructed a mediation model to test the mediation effects of BMI on the total effect of the DASH diet on hypertension. To identify a metabolite panel associated with the DASH diet and BMI, we built random forest models for each trait, and selected the common metabolic contributors using five-fold cross-validation error.

RESULTS

We found that BMI fully mediates the association between the DASH diet and hypertension, explaining 39.1% of the variance in hypertension. We then identified a panel of six common metabolites predicting both the DASH diet and BMI with opposing effects. Interestingly, at the univariate level, the metabolites were also associated with hypertension in the same direction as BMI. The strongest feature, 1-nonadecanoyl-GPC (19:0), was positively associated with the DASH diet (β [SE] = 0.65 [0.12]) and negatively with BMI (β [SE] = -1.34 [0.12]) and hypertension (odds ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.6-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

We highlight the role of BMI in the mechanisms by which the DASH diet influences hypertension and also highlight common metabolic pathways. Further studies should investigate the underlying molecular mechanisms to increase our understanding of the beneficial ways of treating hypertension.

Establishing target systolic and diastolic blood pressure in diabetic patients with hypertension: what do we need to consider?

INTRODUCTION

The optimum target for systolic and diastolic blood pressure remains divisive. In particular, the conflicting outcomes of the SPRINT and ACCORD trials have led to a divergence of guideline-recommended blood pressure targets for adults with diabetes.

AREAS COVERED

Here, we review the existing recommendations for blood pressure targets in diabetes, discussing the evidence base behind them and their limitations. We start by outlining the risks and benefits of lower systolic blood pressure targets among diabetics. We then follow with a separate appraisal of diastolic blood pressure targets, which necessitates examination of the 'J curve' and isolated diastolic hypertension.

EXPERT OPINION

Current and emerging evidence supports, on balance, a blood pressure therapeutic target of < 130/90 mmHg in adults at increased risk for cardiovascular disease, including diabetics. Whether certain diabetics with systolic BPs of 120-130 and/or diastolic BPs 80-90 mmHg require drug treatment to a target of <120/80 mmHg is less clear and requires more research.

Association of blood pressure and long-term change with chronic kidney disease risk among Chinese adults with different glucose metabolism according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines

Whether the definition of hypertension according to 2017 AHA/ACC guidelines and blood pressure (BP) changes was related to the increased risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) remained debated. This prospective cohort study aimed to investigate the association of BP and long‐term BP change with CKD risk with different glucose metabolism according to the new hypertension guidelines. This study examined 12 951 participants and 11 183 participants derived from the older people cohort study, respectively. Participants were divided into three groups based on blood glucose and the risks were assessmented by the logistic regression model. During a 10 years of follow‐up period, 2727 individuals developed CKD (21.1%). Compared with those with BP < 130/80 mmHg, individuals with increased BP levels had significantly increased risk of incident CKD. Participants with BP of 130–139/80–89 or ≥140/90 mmHg had 1.51‐ and 1.89‐fold incident risk of CKD in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Compared with individuals with stable BP (−5 to 5 mmHg), the risk of CKD was reduced when BP decreased by 5 mmHg or more and increased when BP increased ≥5 mmHg among normoglycemia and prediabetes participants. Similar results were observed for rapid estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline. In conclusion, the BP of 130–139/80–89 mmHg combined with prediabetes or DM had an increased risk of incident CKD and rapid eGFR decline in older people. Long‐term changes of BP by more than 5 mmHg among normoglycemia or prediabetes were associated with the risk of incident CKD and rapid eGFR decline.

Guideline-Driven Management of Hypertension: An Evidence-Based Update

Several important findings bearing on the prevention, detection, and management of hypertension have been reported since publication of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Blood Pressure Guideline. This review summarizes and places in context the results of relevant observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses published between January 2018 and March 2021. Topics covered include blood pressure measurement, patient evaluation for secondary hypertension, cardiovascular disease risk assessment and blood pressure threshold for drug therapy, lifestyle and pharmacological management, treatment target blood pressure goal, management of hypertension in older adults, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, resistant hypertension, and optimization of care using patient, provider, and health system approaches. Presenting new information in each of these areas has the potential to increase hypertension awareness, treatment, and control which remain essential for the prevention of cardiovascular disease and mortality in the future.

Gender-stratified hierarchical modeling of patient and physician determinants of antihypertensive treatment outcomes: pooled analysis of seven prospective real-world studies with 17,044 patients

OBJECTIVE

Seven prospective real-world studies conducted in general practices in Belgium of antihypertensive treatment with valsartan-centric regimens were pooled to examine similarities and differences in determinants of blood pressure (BP) values (mmHg) and BP control rates between female and male patients.

METHODS

Pooled analysis of a total evaluable sample of 17,044 patients, including 8273 (48.5%) women and 8771 men (51.5%) treated over approximately 90 days with valsartan-centric regimens in second or later line. Hierarchical linear and logistic regressions were applied to identify patient- and physician-related determinants of BP outcomes and a potential physician class effect.

RESULTS

Reductions in BP (mmHg) over 90 days were similar for women and men, and so were changes in BP control rates. Approximately a quarter of the variance in 90 day BP values was attributable to a physician class effect. Both gender groups shared some patient- and physician-related determinants of BP outcomes, though often varying in degree of influence. Analyses also revealed gender-specific determinants. Among others, modifiable/manageable patient-related determinants included BP at hypertension diagnosis (proxy for time of diagnosis), risk factors, antihypertensive treatment and adherence; while among the physician-related determinants clinical experience in hypertension treatment was modifiable/manageable.

CONCLUSION

Valsartan-centric treatment regimens are associated with significant reductions in BP level and improvement in BP control in both women and men. The determinants revealed in modeling provide guidance to clinicians in the common and differential management of hypertension in female and male patients.

Hypertension (Blood Pressure) and Lifetime Risk of Target Organ Damage

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe the long-term or lifetime relationship between blood pressure and target organ damage. The use of the term "blood pressure" as opposed to hypertension is purposeful. The risk of cardiovascular disease from blood pressure begins below the levels of blood pressure defined as hypertension by contemporary definitions.

RECENT FINDINGS

An important recent publication that bears on this topic was the 2017 ACC/AHA Blood Pressure Management Guidelines. The redefinition of hypertension and blood pressure treatment goal to 130/80 mmHg and the decision to rely almost exclusively on data from event-based randomized controlled clinical trials, which led to a recommendation for lifestyle therapy only for most with stage 1 hypertension, were important. A report from the CARDIA study demonstrated significant risk for cardiovascular disease at 20 years for stage 1 hypertension. Based on all evidence, clinicians should consider the use of medication for stage 1 hypertension in those uncontrolled on lifestyle therapy.