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

A novel CS-NET architecture based on the unification of CNN, SVM and super-resolution spectrogram to monitor and classify blood pressure using photoplethysmography

CONTEXT

Continuous blood pressure (BP) monitoring plays an important role while treating various cardiovascular diseases and hypertension. A high correlation between arterial blood pressure (ABP) and Photoplethysmogram (PPG) signal enables using a PPG signal to monitor and classify BP continuously. Control of BP in realtime is the basis for the prevention of hypertension.

PROPOSED APPROACH

This work proposes a CS-NET architecture by unifying CNN and SVM approaches to classify BP using PPG signals. The main objective of the CS-NET method is to establish an accurate and reliable algorithm for the ABP classification.

METHODOLOGY

ABP signals are labeled normal and abnormal using the hypertension criteria the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) laid down. The proposed CS-NET model incorporates three critical steps in three successive stages. The first stage includes converting a preprocessed PPG signal into a time-frequency (TF) representation called a super-resolution spectrogram by superlet transform. The second stage uses a convolutional neural network (CNN) model with several hidden layers to extract morphological features from every PPG super-resolution spectrogram. The third stage uses a support vector machine (SVM) classifier to classify the PPG signal.

RESULTS

PPG signals are used to train and test the proposed model. The performance of the proposed CS-NET method is tested using MIMIC-II, MIMIC-III, and PPG-BP-figshare database in terms of accuracy and F1 score. Moreover, the CS-NET method achieves better results with high accuracy when compared with other benchmark approaches that require an electrocardiogram signal for reference.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed model achieved an aggregate classification accuracy of 98.21% across a five-fold cross-validation technique, making it a reliable approach for BP classification in clinical settings and realtime monitoring.

Generalisability and potential deaths averted from intensive blood pressure treatment among the elderly population in the US and China: A nationally representative cross-sectional study

Background

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) from the US and the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial from China have consistently demonstrated clinical benefits from intensive blood pressure (BP) treatment among elderly adults with hypertension. However, we have little data on the generalisability and potential implications of a scale-up of intensive BP treatment to all eligible elderly in the US and China.

Methods

We used two nationally representative data sets from China (Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHALRS), 2011-2012) and the US (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 2007-2012) and linked them with CHARLS follow-up data (2013) and the National Death Index (1999-2015), respectively. We estimated the percentage, number, and characteristics of elderly (≥60 years old) meeting the STEP and SPRINT eligibility criteria, and deaths that would be prevented or postponed with the implementation of intensive BP treatment.

Results

Among the Chinese adults aged 60 years and over, 38.89% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 36.97-40.84) or 85.39 (95% CI = 81.14-89.64) million subjects met the STEP criteria, and 40.90 million (47.90%) adults were not taking antihypertensive medications. In the US, 23.77% (95% CI = 22.32%-25.28) or 12.46 (95% CI = 11.68-13.24) million elderly were eligible for the SPRINT, and 5.78 million (46.36%) were untreated. Overall, 0.07 (95% CI = 0.06-0.08) million deaths in the US and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.25-0.39) in China would be averted annually if intensive BP treatment was implemented, while 120 000 and 680 000 of hypotension cases would be identified yearly inthe US and China, respectively.

Conclusions

A substantial percentage of Chinese and the US elderly meet the eligibility criteria for STEP and SPRINT. If intensive BP treatment was adopted, 70 000 and 310 000 deaths would be prevented or postponed yearly in the US and China, respectively.

The role of dietary salt in metabolism and energy balance: Insights beyond cardiovascular disease

Dietary salt (NaCl) is essential to an organism's survival. However, today's diets are dominated by excessive salt intake, which significantly impacts individual and population health. High salt intake is closely linked to cardiovascular disease (CVD), especially hypertension, through a number of well-studied mechanisms. Emerging evidence indicates that salt overconsumption may also be associated with metabolic disorders. In this review, we first summarize recent updates on the mechanisms of salt-induced CVD, the effects of salt reduction and the use of salt substitution as a therapy. Next, we focus on how high salt intake can impact metabolism and energy balance, describing the mechanisms through which this occurs, including leptin resistance, the overproduction of fructose and ghrelin, insulin resistance and altered hormonal factors. A further influence on metabolism worth noting is the reported role of salt in inducing thermogenesis and increasing body temperature, leading to an increase in energy expenditure. While this result could be viewed as a positive metabolic effect because it promotes a negative energy balance to combat obesity, caution must be taken with this frame of thinking given the deleterious consequences of chronic high salt intake on cardiovascular health. Nevertheless, this review highlights the importance of salt as a noncaloric nutrient in regulating whole-body energy homeostasis. Through this review, we hope to provide a scientific framework for future studies to systematically address the metabolic impacts of dietary salt and salt replacement treatments. In addition, we hope to form a foundation for future clinical trials to explore how these salt-induced metabolic changes impact obesity development and progression, and to elucidate the regulatory mechanisms that drive these changes, with the aim of developing novel therapeutics for obesity and CVD.

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.

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.

Use of Perindopril Arginine/Indapamide/Amlodipine in the Management of Hypertension in Two Sub-Saharan African Island Countries of Madagascar and Mauritius

INTRODUCTION

Most patients with hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa require two or more drugs to control their blood pressure. Triple fixed-dose combination therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine is more effective in lowering blood pressure, offers better target organ protection and has increased adherence compared to monotherapy and free combination therapy, and is safe to use. This observational study evaluates the effectiveness of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine in controlling blood pressure at least 1 month after treatment initiation and assesses patient- and physician- reported drug tolerance over a 3-month period in Madagascar and Mauritius.

METHODS

A total of 198 patients with hypertension in ambulatory care who had been on fixed-dose combination of perindopril arginine, indapamide, and amlodipine for at least 4 weeks were included. The main outcome measures were changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, attainment of blood pressure control under 140/90 mmHg and 130/80 mmHg, self-reported drug tolerance by the patient, and perceived drug tolerance by the treating physician. Data was collected at 1 month and 3 months.

RESULTS

Mean systolic blood pressure was significantly lower at the 1-month (- 3.4 mmHg, p = 0.002) and 3-month (- 8.5 mmHg, p < 0.0001) visits. Diastolic blood pressure also decreased significantly (- 2.4 mmHg at 1-month, p = 0.017 and - 5.4 mmHg at the 3-month visits, p < 0.0001). At 3 months, 80.4% of the patients attained blood pressure targets less than 140/90 mmHg and 42.7% attained targets less than 130/80 mmHg on the basis of their baseline blood pressure. Excellent drug tolerance was reported by more than 90% of patients and physicians at the 1-month visit and by more than 95% at the 3-month visit.

CONCLUSION

Triple fixed-dose therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine continues to show additional blood pressure-lowering capacity even months after initiating the treatment in patients with hypertension in Madagascar and Mauritius. It is also well tolerated by patients with hypertension and assessed as safe to use by physicians.

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.