Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and blood pressure control in patients with coronary artery disease-A randomized controlled trial

Association of ambulatory blood pressure with coronary microvascular and cardiac dysfunction in asymptomatic type 2 diabetes

Background

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension commonly coexist and are associated with subclinical myocardial structural and functional changes. We sought to determine the association between blood pressure (BP) and left ventricular (LV) remodeling, systolic/diastolic function, and coronary microvascular function, among individuals with T2D without prevalent cardiovascular disease.

Methods

Participants with T2D and age-, sex-, and ethnicity-matched controls underwent comprehensive cardiovascular phenotyping including fasting bloods, transthoracic echocardiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging with quantitative adenosine stress/rest perfusion, and office and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring. Multivariable linear regression was performed to determine independent associations between BP and imaging markers of remodeling and function in T2D.

Results

Individuals with T2D (n = 205, mean age 63 ± 7 years) and controls (n = 40, mean age 61 ± 8 years) were recruited. Mean 24-h systolic BP, but not office BP, was significantly greater among those with T2D compared to controls (128.8 ± 11.7 vs 123.0 ± 13.1 mmHg, p = 0.006). Those with T2D had concentric LV remodeling (mass/volume 0.91 ± 0.15 vs 0.82 ± 0.11 g/mL, p < 0.001), decreased myocardial perfusion reserve (2.82 ± 0.83 vs 3.18 ± 0.82, p = 0.020), systolic dysfunction (global longitudinal strain 16.0 ± 2.3 vs 17.2 ± 2.1%, p = 0.004) and diastolic dysfunction (E/e’ 9.30 ± 2.43 vs 8.47 ± 1.53, p = 0.044) compared to controls. In multivariable regression models adjusted for 14 clinical variables, mean 24-h systolic BP was independently associated with concentric LV remodeling (β = 0.165, p = 0.031), diastolic dysfunction (β = 0.273, p < 0.001) and myocardial perfusion reserve (β = − 0.218, p = 0.016). Mean 24-h diastolic BP was associated with LV concentric remodeling (β = 0.201, p = 0.016).

Conclusion

24-h ambulatory systolic BP, but not office BP, is independently associated with cardiac remodeling, coronary microvascular dysfunction, and diastolic dysfunction among asymptomatic individuals with T2D. (Clinical trial registration. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03132129 Unique identifier: NCT03132129).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12933-022-01528-2.

Lack of Effects of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Activity and Beta-Adrenoceptor Pathway Polymorphisms on the Response to Bisoprolol in Hypertension

Purpose

This study examined the effects of plasma renin activity (PRA), angiotensin II (Ang II) and aldosterone (PAC) concentrations as well as common polymorphisms in the β₁-Adrenoceptor gene (ADRB1) and the G-protein α-Subunit (G_αs) protein gene the G protein α-Subunit 1 gene (GNAS) on the blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) response to bisoprolol in Chinese patients with hypertension.

Methods

Patients with sitting clinic systolic BP (SBP) 140–169 mmHg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) 90–109 mmHg after placebo run-in were treated with open-label bisoprolol 2.5 mg daily for 6 weeks. Patients diagnosed as having primary aldosteronism or renal artery stenosis were excluded. PRA, Ang II and PAC concentrations were measured after the placebo run-in and after 6 weeks of treatment. The Ser49Gly and Arg389Gly polymorphisms in ADRB1 and the c.393C > T polymorphism in GNAS were genotyped by the TaqMan^® assay.

Results

In 99 patients who completed the study, baseline PAC levels were significantly associated with baseline DBP and plasma potassium on univariate but not on multivariate linear regression analysis. PRA, Ang II, and PAC concentrations at baseline were not associated with changes in BP with bisoprolol treatment, but the values were all significantly reduced (PRA −0.141 ± 0.595 ng/mL/h, Ang II −2.390 ± 5.171 pmol/L and aldosterone −51.86 ± 119.1 pg/mL; all P < 0.05) following 6 weeks of bisoprolol treatment. There were no significant differences in BP or HR responses in patients with baseline PRA above or below the PRA cut-point of 0.65 ng/mL/h or the median value of 0.9 ng/ml/hour. There were no significant associations of the ADRB1 and GNAS polymorphisms with the clinic and ambulatory BP and HR responses to bisoprolol.

Conclusion

Baseline PRA, PAC and Ang II concentrations showed no significant association with the BP response to bisoprolol treatment, but all these parameters were reduced after 6 weeks of treatment with bisoprolol. The two common polymorphisms in ADRB1 and the c.393C > T polymorphism in GNAS had no significant association with the BP and HR response to bisoprolol in these patients.