Masked hypertension in renal transplant recipients

Primary and secondary paediatric hypertension

High blood pressure (BP) or hypertension is a well known risk factor for developing heart attack, stroke, atrial fibrillation and renal failure. Although in the past hypertension was supposed to develop at middle age, it is now widely recognized that it begins early during childhood. As such, approximately 5-10% of children and adolescents are hypertensive. Unlike that previously reported, it is now widely accepted that primary hypertension is the most diffuse form of high BP encountered even in paediatric age, while secondary hypertension accounts just for a minority of the cases. There are significant differences between that outlined by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the last statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) concerning the BP cut-offs to identify young hypertensive individuals. Not only that, but the AAP have also excluded obese children in the new normative data. This is undoubtedly a matter of concern. Conversely, both the AAP and ESH/ESC agree that medical therapy should be reserved just for nonresponders to measures like weight loss/salt intake reduction/increase in aerobic exercise. Secondary hypertension often occurs in aortic coarctation or chronic renal disease patients. The former can develop hypertension despite early effective repair. This is associated with significant morbidity and is arguably the most important adverse outcome in about 30% of these subjects. Also, syndromic patients, for example those with Williams syndrome, may suffer from a generalized aortopathy, which triggers increased arterial stiffness and hypertension. This review summarizes the state-of-the-art situation regarding primary and secondary paediatric hypertension.

Arterial hypertension in kidney transplantation: huge importance, but few answers

Abstract Arterial hypertension (AH) after renal transplantation (RTX) is correlated with worse cardiovascular and renal outcomes, with loss of renal function, decreased graft survival and higher mortality. RTX recipients have discrepant blood pressure (BP) values when measured in the office or by systematic methodologies, such as Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM), with significant prevalence of no nocturnal dipping or nocturnal hypertension, white coat hypertension and masked hypertension. The aim of the present study was to review the issue of hypertension in RTX, addressing its multifactorial pathophysiology and demonstrating the importance of ABPM as a tool for monitoring BP in these patients. Treatment is based on lifestyle changes and antihypertensive drugs, with calcium channel blockers considered first-line treatment. The best blood pressure target and treatment with more favorable outcomes in RTX are yet to be determined, through well-conducted scientific studies, that is, in terms of AH in RTX, we currently have more questions to answer than answers to give.

Hipertensão arterial no transplante renal: grande importância, mas poucas respostas

Resumo Hipertensão arterial (HA) no póstransplante renal (TXR) se correlaciona com piores desfechos cardiovasculares e renais, com perda de função renal, diminuição da sobrevida do enxerto e maior mortalidade. Receptores de TXR apresentam valores discrepantes de pressão arterial (PA) quando ela é obtida em consultório ou por metodologias sistematizadas, como a Monitorização Ambulatorial da PA (MAPA), com prevalências significantes de ausência de descenso noturno ou hipertensão noturna, hipertensão do avental branco e hipertensão mascarada. O objetivo do presente estudo foi rever a temática da hipertensão no TXR, abordando sua fisiopatologia multifatorial e demonstrando a importância da MAPA como ferramenta de acompanhamento da PA nesses pacientes. O tratamento é baseado em mudanças no estilo de vida e em fármacos anti-hipertensivos, sendo os bloqueadores de canais de cálcio considerados de primeira linha. A melhor meta pressórica e o tratamento com desfechos mais favoráveis no TXR ainda estão por ser determinados, por meio de estudos bem conduzidos cientificamente, ou seja, em termos de HA no TXR temos atualmente mais questões a responder do que respostas a dar.

Assessment of hypertension in kidney transplantation by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hypertension (HTN) is common following renal transplantation and it is associated with adverse effects on cardiovascular (CV) and graft health. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is the preferred method to characterize blood pressure (BP) status, since HTN misclassification by office BP (OBP) is quite common in this population. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at determining the clinical utility of 24-h ABPM and its potential implications for the management of HTN in this population.

Methods

Ovid-MEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched for interventional or observational studies enrolling adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) undergoing 24-h ABP readings compared with OBP or home BP. The main outcome was the proportion of KTRs diagnosed with HTN by ABPM, home or OBP recordings. Additionally, day-night BP variability and dipper/non-dipper status were assessed.

Results

Forty-two eligible studies (4115 participants) were reviewed. A cumulative analysis including 27 studies (3481 participants) revealed a prevalence of uncontrolled HTN detected by ABPM of 56% [95% confidence interval (CI) 46-65%]. The pooled prevalence of uncontrolled HTN according to OBP was 47% (95% CI 36-58%) in 25 studies (3261 participants). Very few studies reported on home BP recordings. The average concordance rate between OBP and ABPM measurements in classifying patients as controlled or uncontrolled hypertensive was 66% (95% CI 59-73%). ABPM revealed HTN phenotypes among KTRs. Two pooled analyses of 11 and 10 studies, respectively, revealed an average prevalence of 26% (95% CI 19-33%) for masked HTN (MHT) and 10% (95% CI 6-17%) for white-coat HTN (WCH). The proportion of non-dippers was variable across the 28 studies that analysed dipping status, with an average prevalence of 54% (95% CI 45-63%).

Conclusions

In our systematic review, comparison of OBP versus ABP measurements disclosed a high proportion of MHT, uncontrolled HTN and, to a lesser extent, WCH in KTRs. These results suggest that HTN is not adequately diagnosed and controlled by OBP recordings in this population. Furthermore, the high prevalence of non-dippers confirmed that circadian rhythm is commonly disturbed in KTRs.

Ambulatory blood pressure trajectories and blood pressure variability in kidney transplant recipients: a comparative study against hemodialysis patients

Background

Hypertension is the most prevalent cardiovascular risk factor in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Preliminary data suggest similar ambulatory blood pressure (BP) levels in KTRs and haemodialysis (HD) patients. This is the first study comparing the full ambulatory BP profile and short-term BP variability (BPV) in KTRs versus HD patients.

Methods

A total of 204 KTRs were matched (2:1 ratio) with 102 HD patients for age and gender. BP levels, BP trajectories and BPV indices over a 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) in KTRs were compared against both the first and second 24-h periods of a standard 48-h ABPM in HD patients. To evaluate the effect of renal replacement treatment and time on ambulatory BP levels, a two-way ANOVA for repeated measurements was performed.

Results

KTRs had significantly lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) and pulse-pressure (PP) levels compared with HD patients during all periods studied (24-h SBP: KTR: 126.5 ± 12.1 mmHg; HD first 24 h: 132.0 ± 18.1 mmHg; P = 0.006; second 24 h: 134.3 ± 17.7 mmHg; P < 0.001); no significant differences were noted for diastolic blood pressure levels with the exception of the second nighttime. Repeated measurements ANOVA showed a significant effect of renal replacement therapy modality and time on ambulatory SBP levels during all periods studied, and a significant interaction between them; the greatest between-group difference in BP (KTRs–HD in mmHg) was observed at the end of the second 24 h [–13.9 mmHg (95% confidence interval –21.5 to –6.2); P < 0.001]. Ambulatory systolic and diastolic BPV indices were significantly lower in KTRs than in HD patients during all periods studied (24-h SBP average real variability: KTRs: 9.6 ± 2.3 mmHg; HD first 24 h: 10.3 ± 3.0 mmHg; P = 0.032; second 24 h: 11.5 ± 3.0 mmHg; P < 0.001). No differences were noted in dipping pattern between the two groups.

Conclusions

SBP and PP levels and trajectories, and BPV were significantly lower in KTRs compared with age- and gender-matched HD patients during all periods studied. These findings suggest a more favourable ambulatory BP profile in KTRs, in contrast to previous observations.

Role of hypertension in kidney transplant recipients

Cardiovascular events are one of the leading causes of mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Hypertension is the most common comorbidity accompanying chronic kidney disease, with prevalence remaining as high as 90% even after kidney transplantation. It is often poorly controlled. Abnormal blood pressure profiles, such as masked or white-coat hypertension, are also extremely common in these patients. The pathophysiology of blood pressure elevation in kidney transplant recipients is complex and includes transplantation-specific risk factors, which are added to the traditional or chronic kidney disease-related factors. Despite these observations, hypertension management has been an under-researched area in kidney transplantation. Thus, relevant evidence derives either from studies in the general population or from small trials in kidney transplant recipients. Based on the relevant guidelines in the general population, lifestyle modifications should probably be applied as the first step of hypertension management in kidney transplant recipients. The optimal pharmacological management of hypertension in kidney transplant recipients is also not clear. Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are commonly used as first line agents because of their lack of adverse effects on the kidney, while other antihypertensive drug classes are under-utilised due to fear of the possible haemodynamic consequences on renal function. This review summarizes the existing data on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, prognostic significance and management of hypertension in kidney transplantation.

Diagnostic Performance of Office versus Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Kidney Transplant Recipients

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is the most prominent risk factor in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). No study so far assessed in parallel the prevalence, control, and phenotypes of blood pressure (BP) or the accuracy of currently recommended office BP diagnostic thresholds in diagnosing elevated ambulatory BP in KTRs.

METHODS

205 stable KTRs underwent office BP measurements and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Hypertension was defined as follows: (1) office BP ≥140/90 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents following the current European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension (ESC/ESH) guidelines, (2) office BP ≥130/80 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents following the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, (3) ABPM ≥130/80 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents, and (4) ABPM ≥125/75 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents.

RESULTS

Hypertension prevalence by office BP was 88.3% with ESC/ESH and 92.7% with ACC/AHA definitions compared to 94.1 and 98.5% at relevant ABPM thresholds. Control rates among hypertensive patients were 69.6 and 43.7% with office BP compared to 38.3 and 21.3% with ABPM, respectively. Both for prevalence (κ-statistics = 0.52, p < 0.001 and 0.32, and p < 0.001) and control rates (κ-statistics = 0.21, p < 0.001 and 0.22, and p < 0.001, respectively), there was moderate or fair agreement of the 2 techniques. White-coat and masked hypertension were diagnosed in 6.7 and 39.5% of patients at the 140/90 threshold and 5.9 and 31.7% of patients at the 130/80 threshold. An office BP ≥140/90 mm Hg had 35.3% sensitivity and 84.9% specificity for the diagnosis of 24-h BP ≥130/80 mm Hg. An office BP ≥130/80 mm Hg had 59.7% sensitivity and 73.9% specificity for the diagnosis of 24-h BP ≥125/75 mm Hg. Receiver operating curve analyses confirmed this poor diagnostic performance.

CONCLUSIONS

At both corresponding thresholds studied, ABPM revealed particularly high hypertension prevalence and poor BP control in KTRs. Misclassification of KTRs by office BP is substantial, due to particularly high rates of masked hypertension. The diagnostic accuracy of office BP for identifying elevated ambulatory BP is poor. These findings call for a wider use of ABPM in KTRs.

Hypertension in kidney transplantation: a consensus statement of the 'hypertension and the kidney' working group of the European Society of Hypertension

Hypertension is common in kidney transplantation recipients and may be difficult to treat. Factors present before kidney transplantation, related to the transplantation procedure itself and factors developing after transplantation may contribute to blood pressure (BP) elevation in kidney transplant recipients. The present consensus is based on the results of three recent systematic reviews, the latest guidelines and the current literature. The current transplant guidelines, which recommend only office BP assessments for risk stratification in kidney transplant patients should be reconsidered, given the presence of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension in this population and the better prediction of adverse outcomes by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring as indicated in recent systematic reviews. Hypertension is associated with adverse kidney and cardiovascular outcomes and decreased survival in kidney transplant recipients. Current evidence suggests calcium channel blockers could be the preferred first-step antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant patients, as they improve graft function and reduce graft loss, whereas no clear benefit is documented for renin-angiotensin system inhibitor use over conventional treatment in the current literature. Randomized control trials demonstrating the clinical benefits of BP lowering on kidney and major cardiovascular events and recording patient-related outcomes are still needed. These trials should define optimal BP targets for kidney transplant recipients. In the absence of kidney transplant-specific evidence, BP targets in kidney transplant recipients should be similar to those in the wider chronic kidney disease population.

Masked Hypertension and Obesity in Renal Transplant Recipients

The diagnosis of arterial hypertension has traditionally been based on measurements of blood pressure (BP) in the clinic. However, home or ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) is reported to correlate better with target organ damage than clinic BP readings. The other potential advantage of out-of-clinic BP measurement is the detection of both white-coat hypertension (WCHT) and masked hypertension (MHT). Studies have suggested that MHT have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We aimed to investigate the prevalence of MHT and to evaluate risk factors by ABPM in our renal transplant recipients. One hundred twenty-ninety patients who were followed up in our nephrology clinic were included in the study. The prevalence of MHT was 17%. In logistic regression analysis, we investigated factors associated with MHT. In a model with age, sex, smoking, presence of Diabetes mellitus (DM) and blood glucose, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), donor type, body mass index, waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), we found that WHR (r: 18.61, P: .007) and smoking (r: 2.79, P: .011) were related with MHT. MHT was related to target organ damage and cardiovascular disease. The diagnosis and treatment of MHT are important. These findings suggesting that patients with high WC and smokers should be investigated with ABPM to diagnose masked hypertension. This approach may reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes after transplantation.

Ambulatory monitoring unmasks hypertension among kidney transplant patients: single center experience and review of the literature

Background

Disagreements between clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurements are well-described in the general population. Though hypertension is frequent in renal transplant recipients, only a few studies address the clinic-ambulatory discordance in this population. We aimed to describe the difference between clinic and ambulatory BP in kidney transplant patients at our institution.

Methods

We compared the clinic and ambulatory BP of 76 adult recipients of a kidney allograft followed at our transplant center and investigated the difference between these methods, considering confounding by demographic and clinical variables.

Results

Clinic systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were 128 ± 13/79 ± 9 mmHg. Awake SBP and DBP were 147 ± 18/85 ± 10 mmHg. The clinic-minus-awake SBP and DBP differences were − 18 and − 6 mmHg, respectively. The negative clinic-awake ΔSBP was more pronounced at age > 60 years (p = 0.026) and with tacrolimus use compared to cyclosporine (p = 0.046). Sleep SBP and DBP were 139 ± 21/78 ± 11 mmHg. A non-dipping sleep BP pattern was noted in 73% of patients and was associated with tacrolimus use (p = 0.020).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest pervasive underestimation of BP when measured in the kidney transplant clinic, emphasizes the high frequency of a non-dipping pattern in this population and calls for liberal use of ambulatory BP monitoring to detect and manage hypertension.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12882-019-1442-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension in CKD

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) is diagnosed in patients treated for hypertension who are normotensive in the clinic but hypertensive outside. In this study of 333 veterans with CKD, we prospectively evaluated the prevalence of MUCH as determined by ambulatory BP monitoring using three definitions of hypertension (daytime hypertension ≥135/85 mmHg; either nighttime hypertension ≥120/70 mmHg or daytime hypertension; and 24-hour hypertension ≥130/80 mmHg) or by home BP monitoring (hypertension ≥135/85 mmHg). The prevalence of MUCH was 26.7% by daytime ambulatory BP, 32.8% by 24-hour ambulatory BP, 56.1% by daytime or night-time ambulatory BP, and 50.8% by home BP. To assess the reproducibility of the diagnosis, we repeated these measurements after 4 weeks. Agreement in MUCH diagnosis by ambulatory BP was 75-78% (κ coefficient for agreement, 0.44-0.51), depending on the definition used. In contrast, home BP showed an agreement of only 63% and a κ coefficient of 0.25. Prevalence of MUCH increased with increasing clinic systolic BP: 2% in the 90-110 mmHg group, 17% in the 110-119 mmHg group, 34% in the 120-129 mmHg group, and 66% in the 130-139 mmHg group. Clinic BP was a good determinant of MUCH (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.76-0.87). In diagnosing MUCH, home BP was not different from clinic BP. In conclusion, among people with CKD, MUCH is common and reproducible, and should be suspected when clinic BP is in the prehypertensive range. Confirmation of MUCH diagnosis should rely on ambulatory BP monitoring.

Hypertension, living kidney donors, and transplantation: where are we today?

Hypertension is a prevalent problem in kidney transplant recipients that is known to be a "traditional" risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease leading to premature allograft failure and death. Donor, peritransplant, and recipient factors affect hypertension risk. Blood pressure control after transplantation is inversely associated with glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Calcineurin inhibitors, the most commonly used class of immunosuppressives, cause endothelial dysfunction, increase vascular tone, and sodium retention via the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system resulting in systemic hypertension. Steroid withdrawal seems to have little impact on blood pressure control. Newer agents like belatacept appear to be associated with less hypertension. Transplant renal artery stenosis is an important, potentially treatable cause of hypertension. Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers mitigate calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity and may be associated with improved estimated GFR. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are not recommended in the first 3 to 6 months given their effects on reduced estimated GFR, anemia, and hyperkalemia. The use of ß-blockers may be associated with improved patient survival, even for patients without cardiovascular disease. Living donation may increase blood pressure by 5 mm Hg or more. Some transplant centers accept Caucasian living donors with well-controlled hypertension on a single agent if they agree to close follow-up.

Comparison of office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure in heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the relationship between office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in heart transplant recipients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study enrolled 30 adults ≥ 6 months after heart transplantation. Morning seated office BP was measured with the use of an automatic device at 3 outpatient visits. Seated home BP was measured in the morning and evening for 5 consecutive days. Ambulatory BP was measured over 24 hours with the use of a Spacelabs monitor. The strongest correlation was observed between home and 24-hour ambulatory BP (r = 0.79 systolic; r = 0.72 diastolic). Office and home systolic BPs were significantly lower than daytime ambulatory BP (office, -3.7 mm Hg, P = .009; home, -2.6 mm Hg, P = .05). Ambulatory monitoring identified more participants with BP above hypertensive limits than did office or home measurements (63%, 50%, and 13%, respectively; P = .003). Ambulatory monitoring also revealed high BP loads, abnormal nocturnal BP patterns (eg, 30% nondippers), and a high percentage of masked hypertension (37% home, 50% ambulatory).

CONCLUSIONS

Office and home BP monitoring are acceptable but may underestimate BP burden in heart transplant recipients. Additional studies are needed to determine which BP method is superior for the management of hypertension and associated outcomes after heart transplantation.

Hypertension after kidney transplantation: a pathophysiologic approach

Post-transplant hypertension is associated with decreased graft and patient survival and cardiovascular morbidity. Unfortunately, post-transplant hypertension is often poorly controlled. Important risk factors include immunosuppressive medications, complications of the transplant surgery, delayed graft function, rejection, and donor and recipient risk factors. The effects of immunosuppressive medications are multifactorial including increased vascular and sympathetic tone and salt and fluid retention. The immunosuppressive agents most commonly associated with hypertension are glucocorticoids and calcineurin inhibitors. Drug therapy for hypertension should be based on the comorbidities and pathophysiology. Evidence-based approaches to defining and treating hypertension in renal transplant recipients are predominantly extrapolated from large-scale studies performed in the general population. Thus, there continues to be a need for larger studies examining the pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in renal transplant recipients.