24-hour Ambulatory Systolic Blood Pressure Research Articles

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Second-Generation Sham-Controlled Randomized Trials of Renal Denervation Therapy for Patients with Hypertension.

Renal denervation has been associated with substantial and sustained blood pressure reduction and is considered to serve as an alternative treatment for patients with resistant hypertension. However, the first published SHAM-controlled trial assessing RDN safety and efficacy showed no difference between groups. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis quantifying the magnitude of blood pressure decrease secondary to renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension. Databases were searched for RCTs that compared RDN therapy to SHAM procedure and reported the outcomes of (1) 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure; (2) Office systolic blood pressure; (3) Daytime systolic blood pressure; and (4) Night-time systolic blood pressure. Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was examined with I² statistics. P values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio 4.2.3. Nine studies and 1622 patients were included. The AMBP [MD -3.72 95%CI -5.44, -2.00 p < 0.001; I²=34%] and DSBP [MD -4.10 95%CI -5.84, -2.37 p < 0.001; I²=0%] were significantly reduced in the RDN arm. ODBP [MD -6.04 95%CI -11.31, -0.78 p = 0.024; I²=90%] and NSBP [MD -1.81 95%CI -3.90, 0.27 p = 0.08; I²=0%] did not reach a statistically significant difference between groups. Renal denervation demonstrates greater efficacy in reducing 24-hour ambulatory and daytime systolic blood pressure in patients diagnosed with resistant hypertension.

Treatment Optimisation for blood Pressure with Single-Pill combinations in INdia (TOPSPIN) – protocol design and baseline characteristics

BackgroundThe burden of over 300 million individuals living with hypertension in India is increasing steadily. Most current guidelines recommend initial combination therapy for effective blood pressure (BP) control. However, there is no randomised evidence to inform which combinations to use in South Asian population accounting for over one-quarter of the world’s population. MethodsThis multi-centre, single-blind, randomised, three-arm trial recruited men and women aged 30-79 years with hypertension. The trial compares the efficacy of commonly recommended single pill combinations (SPCs) of three drug classes – calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), ACE inhibitor (perindopril), and a thiazide-like diuretic (indapamide). The primary objective is to determine the most effective two-drug combination, initially at starting doses with forced up-titration at 2 months, in reducing 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure (ASBP) at 6 months. The trial has 85% power to detect a difference of 3mmHg in 24-hour SBP amongst the groups.Participant recruitment took place from August 2022 to February 2024. Baseline resultsThe 1981 participants (42.0% women) enrolled had a mean age of 52.1(SD 11.3) years and a mean BMI of 26.5(SD 4.2) kg/m2. 58.1% and 18.6% of participants were known to have hypertension and diabetes, respectively. The mean ASBP was 135.6 (SD 17.0) mmHg, and the mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure was 84.5 (SD 10.9) mmHg. ConclusionThe TOPSPIN trial is the first randomised evaluation of commonly used BP-lowering combination therapies in a South Asian population. The results have potentially significant implications for choosing first-line antihypertensive agents among Indians and South Asian diaspora.

Efficacy and Safety of Catheter-Based Radiofrequency Renal Denervation in Chinese Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension: The Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Multi-Center Iberis-HTN Trial.

Renal denervation (RDN) can lower blood pressure (BP) in patients with hypertension in both the presence and absence of medication. This is the first sham-controlled trial investigating the safety and efficacy of RDN in China. This prospective, multicenter, randomized, patient- and outcome-assessor-blinded, sham-controlled trial investigated radiofrequency RDN in patients with hypertension on standardized triple antihypertensive therapy. Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo RDN using a multi-electrode radiofrequency catheter (Iberis; AngioCare, Shanghai, China) or a sham procedure. The primary efficacy outcome was the between-group difference in baseline-adjusted change in mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP from randomization to 6 months. Of 217 randomized patients (mean age, 45.3±10.2 years; 21% female), 107 were randomized to RDN and 110 were randomized to sham control. At 6 months, there was a greater reduction in 24-hour systolic BP in the RDN (-13.0±12.1 mm Hg) compared with the sham control group (-3.0±13.0 mm Hg; baseline-adjusted between-group difference, -9.4 mm Hg [95% CI, -12.8 to -5.9]; P<0.001). Compared with sham, 24-hour diastolic BP was lowered by -5.0 mm Hg ([95% CI, -7.5 to -2.4]; P<0.001) 6 months after RDN, and office systolic and diastolic BP was lowered by -6.4 mm Hg ([95% CI, -10.5 to -2.3]; P=0.003) and -5.1 mm Hg ([95% CI, -8.2 to -2.0]; P=0.001), respectively. One patient in the RDN group experienced an access site complication (hematoma), which resolved without sequelae. No other major device- or procedure-related safety events occurred through follow-up. In this trial of Chinese patients with uncontrolled hypertension on a standardized triple pharmacotherapy, RDN was safe and reduced ambulatory and office BP at 6 months compared with sham. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02901704.

Changes in blood pressure after catheter-based renal denervation in South Africa.

Renal denervation (RDN) is an interventional treatment for patients with uncontrolled hypertension. The Global SYMPLICITY Registry (GSR) is a prospective, all-comer, world-wide registry designed to assess the safety and efficacy of RDN. We evaluated the outcomes in South African patients in the GSR over 12 months. Eligible patients with hypertension had a daytime mean blood pressure (BP) > 135/85 mmHg or night-time mean BP > 120/70 mmHg. Office and 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP reduction and adverse events over 12 months were evaluated. South African patients (n = 36) in the GSR had a mean age of 54.4 ± 9.9 years with a median of four prescribed antihypertensive medication classes. At 12 months, mean changes in office and 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP were -16.9 ± 24.2 and -15.3 ± 18.5 mmHg, respectively, with only one adverse event recorded. RDN safety and efficacy in South African patients were consistent with world-wide GSR results.

Abstract P442: Impact of arterial stiffness on the blood pressure lowering effect of the dual endothelin antagonist aprocitentan in patients with resistant hypertension

Background: The phase-3 PRECISION study demonstrated the efficacy of aprocitentan to lower both office and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in patients with resistant hypertension. Increased arterial stiffness has been associated with less favorable responses to pharmacologic BP lowering therapies. In this post-hoc analysis, we investigated the impact of arterial stiffness, assessed by the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI), on the BP lowering effect of aprocitentan. Methods: The study included a 4-week double blind period (aprocitentan 12.5 mg, 25 mg, or placebo) and a 32-week single blind period (aprocitentan 25 mg). A total of 730 patients with resistant hypertension were randomized and 633 had available ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) results at baseline. The AASI was calculated from ABPM data as 1 minus the regression slope of diastolic on systolic BP. The patient population was dichotomized into two groups according to the baseline median AASI. Results: Patients with higher baseline AASI (≥0.54) tended to be older (63±11 versus 60±10) and to have a higher 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP (140±14 versus 135±14 mmHg) than patients with lower AASI (&lt;0.54). These patients with higher baseline AASI were also more likely to have chronic kidney disease stage 3-4 corresponding to an estimated glomerular filtration rate in the 15 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 range (27% versus 18%). The BP lowering effect of aprocitentan at Week 4 was similar for both the patients with stiffer vasculature who have a higher baseline AASI (≥0.54) and for those with a lower AASI (&lt;0.54) (Table 1). No relevant change in AASI was reported with aprocitentan treatment at Week 4 (end of the double-blind period) or Week 36 (end of the single-blind period). Conclusion: Aprocitentan is an effective BP lowering therapy across the arterial stiffness continuum observed in patients with resistant hypertension. Longer observation times are needed to fully assess the impact of treatment on this structural and functional parameter.

Randomized Trials of Renal Denervation for Uncontrolled Hypertension: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

Despite optimal medical therapy, a significant proportion of patients' blood pressure remains uncontrolled. Catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) has been proposed as a potential intervention for uncontrolled hypertension. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of RDN in patients with uncontrolled hypertension, with emphasis on the differential effect of RDN in patients on and off antihypertensive medications. Online databases were searched to identify randomized clinical trials comparing efficacy and safety of RDN versus control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Subgroup analyses were conducted for sham-controlled trials and studies that used RDN devices that have gained or are currently seeking US Food and Drug Administration approval. Fifteen trials with 2581 patients (RDN, 1723; sham, 858) were included. In patients off antihypertensive medications undergoing RDN, a significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory (-3.70 [95% CI, -5.41 to -2.00] mm Hg), office (-4.76 [95% CI, -7.57 to -1.94] mm Hg), and home (-3.28 [95% CI, -5.96 to -0.61] mm Hg) systolic blood pressures was noted. In patients on antihypertensive medications, a significant reduction was observed in 24-hour ambulatory (-2.23 [95% CI, -3.56 to -0.90] mm Hg), office (-6.39 [95% CI, -11.49 to -1.30]), home (-6.08 [95% CI, -11.54 to -0.61] mm Hg), daytime (-2.62 [95% CI, -4.14 to -1.11]), and nighttime (-2.70 [95% CI, -5.13 to -0.27]) systolic blood pressures, as well as 24-hour ambulatory (-1.16 [95% CI, -1.96 to -0.35]), office (-3.17 [95% CI, -5.54 to -0.80]), and daytime (-1.47 [95% CI, -2.50 to -0.27]) diastolic blood pressures. RDN significantly lowers blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension, in patients off and on antihypertensive medications, with a favorable safety profile. The efficacy of RDN was consistent in sham-controlled trials and contemporary trials using US Food and Drug Administration-approved devices.

The Efficacy of Renal Denervation in Treating Resistant Hypertension: A Systematic Review.

Resistant hypertension is blood pressure (BP) that is persistently above target in spite of the maximally tolerated usage of at least three anti-hypertensives simultaneously. The sympathetic nervous system is instrumental in blood pressure (BP) regulation. Renal (sympathetic) denervation involves using ablative energy to disrupt the sympathetic nerves in renal arteries. This systematic review examines the efficacy of this treatment modality. Abiding by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, we conducted an extensive literature search in five databases, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and ScienceDirect, to retrieve studies that are free, open access, and published in English done within the past four years. Nineteen articles passed critical appraisal. These articles were randomized controlled trials (RCT), a case report, a cross-sectional study, a cohort study, and previous reviews. Renal denervation (RDN) was generally superior to sham control in patients with resistant hypertension for reducing various systolic blood pressure (SBP) measures, including 24-hour ambulatory, daytime, and nighttime SBP. The efficacy was highest in patients whose baseline SBP was higher. BP reduction was sustained for years post-procedure. The procedure had a good safety profile with no severe complications. Future studies should compare the efficacy of different types of renal denervation, such as ethanol ablation versus radiofrequency ablation, and renal denervation against other procedure-based treatment modalities,such as carotid baroreceptor stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation.

UMOD Genotype-Blinded Trial of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Response to Torasemide.

UMOD (uromodulin) has been linked to hypertension through potential activation of Na+-K+-2Cl- cotransporter (NKCC2), a target of loop diuretics. We posited that hypertensive patients carrying the rs13333226-AA UMOD genotype would demonstrate greater blood pressure responses to loop diuretics, potentially mediated by this UMOD/NKCC2 interaction. This prospective, multicenter, genotype-blinded trial evaluated torasemide (torsemide) efficacy on systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction over 16 weeks in nondiabetic, hypertensive participants uncontrolled on ≥1 nondiuretic antihypertensive for >3 months. The primary end point was the change in 24-hour ambulatory SBP (ABPM SBP) and SBP response trajectories between baseline and 16 weeks by genotype (AA versus AG/GG) due to nonrandomized groups at baseline (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03354897). Of 251 enrolled participants, 222 received torasemide and 174 demonstrated satisfactory treatment adherence and had genotype data. The study participants were middle-aged (59±11 years), predominantly male (62%), obese (body mass index, 32±7 kg/m2), with normal eGFR (92±17 mL/min/1.73 m²) and an average baseline ABPM of 138/81 mm Hg. Significant reductions in mean ABPM SBP were observed in both groups after 16 weeks (AA, -6.57 mm Hg [95% CI, -8.44 to -4.69]; P<0.0001; AG/GG, -3.22 [95% CI, -5.93 to -0.51]; P=0.021). The change in mean ABPM SBP (baseline to 16 weeks) showed a difference of -3.35 mm Hg ([95% CI, -6.64 to -0.05]; P=0.048) AA versus AG/GG genotypes. The AG/GG group displayed a rebound in SBP from 8 weeks, differing from the consistent decrease in the AA group (P=0.004 for difference in trajectories). Our results confirm a plausible interaction between UMOD and NKCC2 and suggest a potential role for genotype-guided use of loop diuretics in hypertension management. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03354897.

Effect of Alcohol-Mediated Renal Denervation on Blood Pressure in the Presence of Antihypertensive Medications: Primary Results from the TARGET BP I Randomized Clinical Trial.

Renal denervation (RDN) has demonstrated clinically relevant reductions in blood pressure among individuals with uncontrolled hypertension despite lifestyle intervention and medications. The safety and effectiveness of alcohol-mediated RDN has not been formally studied in this indication. TARGET BP I is a prospective, international, sham-controlled, randomized, patient- and assessor-blinded trial investigating the safety and efficacy of alcohol-mediated RDN. Patients with office systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥150 and ≤180 mmHg, office diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg and mean 24-hour ambulatory SBP ≥135 and ≤170 mmHg, despite prescription of 2-5 antihypertensive medications were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the baseline-adjusted change in mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP at 3 months post procedure. Secondary endpoints include mean between-group differences in office and ambulatory BP at additional time points. Among 301 patients randomized 1:1 to RDN or sham control, RDN was associated with a significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory SBP at 3 months (mean ± standard deviation -10.0 ± 14.2 mmHg versus -6.8 ± 12.1 mmHg, treatment difference -3.2 mmHg, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.3, 0.0 mmHg; P=0.0487). Subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint revealed no significant interaction across predefined subgroups. At 3 months, the mean change in office SBP was -12.7 ± 18.3 mmHg and -9.7 ± 17.3 mmHg (difference, -3.0, 95% CI -7.0, 1.0; P=0.173), for RDN and sham, respectively. No significant differences in ambulatory or office diastolic BP were observed. Adverse safety events through 6 months were uncommon with 1 instance of accessory renal artery dissection in the RDN group (0.7%). No significant between-group differences in medication changes or patient adherence were identified. Alcohol-mediated RDN was associated with a modest but statistically significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP compared with sham control. No significant differences between groups in office BP or 6-month major adverse events were observed.

Design and rationale of the Comprehensive intelligent Hypertension managEment SyStem (CHESS) evaluation study: A cluster randomized controlled trial for hypertension management in primary care

BackgroundHypertension management in China is suboptimal with high prevalence and low control rate due to various barriers, including lack of self-management awareness of patients and inadequate capacity of physicians. Digital therapeutic interventions including mobile health and computational device algorithms such as clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are scalable with the potential to improve blood pressure (BP) management and strengthen the healthcare system in resource-constrained areas, yet their effectiveness remains to be tested. The aim of this report is to describe the protocol of the Comprehensive intelligent Hypertension managEment SyStem (CHESS) evaluation study assessing the effect of a multi-faceted hypertension management system for supporting patients and physicians on BP lowering in primary care settings. Materials and MethodsThe CHESS evaluation study is a parallel-group, cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in primary care settings in China. 41 primary care sites from 3 counties of China are randomly assigned to either the usual care or the intervention group with the implementation of the CHESS system, more than 1600 patients aged 35-80 years with uncontrolled hypertension and access to a smartphone by themselves or relatives are recruited into the study and followed up for 12 months. In the intervention group, participants receive patient-tailored reminders and alerts via messages or intelligent voice calls triggered by uploaded home blood pressure monitoring data and participants’ characteristics, while physicians receive guideline-based prescription instructions according to updated individual data from each visit, and administrators receive auto-renewed feedback of hypertension management performance from the data analysis platform. The multiple components of the CHESS system can work synergistically and have undergone rigorous development and pilot evaluation using a theory-informed approach. The primary outcome is the mean change in 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to 12-month. DiscussionThe CHESS trial will provide evidence and novel insight into the effectiveness and feasibility of an implementation strategy using a comprehensive digital BP management system for reducing hypertension burden in primary care settings. Trial registrationhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05605418

Prognostic impact of hypertension grading

BackgroundMost Hypertension Guidelines grade hypertension according to various cut-off values. We sought to investigate the prognostic impact of Grades 1 (140–159 and/or 90–99 mmHg), 2 (160–179 and/or 100–109 mmHg) and 3 (≥180 and/or ≥110 mmHg). MethodsWe followed for an average of 10 years a cohort of 3,150 initially untreated hypertensive patients (mean age 50 years, 44 % women) with no previous cardiovascular disease at entry. All patients underwent diagnostic tests including 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring. ResultsAt entry, average clinic BP was 156/97 mmHg and average 24-hour BP was 137/87 mmHg. During follow-up, 314 patients experienced a first major cardiovascular event (composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke, cardiovascular death, or hospitalization for heart failure). Event rate was not formally dissimilar between Grade 1 and Grade 2 (0.73 vs 0.95 per 100 patient-years, respectively; p = 0.06). It was higher in Grade 3 (1.93 per 100 patient-years; p < 0.01 vs Grade 1 and Grade 2). After adjustment for a robust set of covariables, the hazard ratio was not dissimilar between Grade 1 and Grade 2 (p = 0.27), and higher in Grade 3 than in Grade 1 (p < 0.01), but the excess risk in Grade 3 was no longer significant (hazard ratio: 1.25, 95 % CI 0.87–1.78; p = 0.22) after adjustment for 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP. ConclusionsWe were unable to find a significant difference in the relative hazard of cardiovascular events tied to hypertension Grades 1 and 2. Conversely, Grade 3 (clinic BP ≥180/110 mmHg) portends a higher cardiovascular risk, which is associated with higher levels of 24-hour ambulatory BP.

RNA Interference With Zilebesiran for Mild to Moderate Hypertension

Angiotensinogen is the most upstream precursor of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, a key pathway in blood pressure (BP) regulation. Zilebesiran, an investigational RNA interference therapeutic, targets hepatic angiotensinogen synthesis. To evaluate antihypertensive efficacy and safety of different zilebesiran dosing regimens. This phase 2, randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging study of zilebesiran vs placebo was performed at 78 sites across 4 countries. Screening initiation occurred in July 2021 and the last patient visit of the 6-month study occurred in June 2023. Adults with mild to moderate hypertension, defined as daytime mean ambulatory systolic BP (SBP) of 135 to 160 mm Hg following antihypertensive washout, were randomized. Randomization to 1 of 4 subcutaneous zilebesiran regimens (150, 300, or 600 mg once every 6 months or 300 mg once every 3 months) or placebo (once every 3 months) for 6 months. The primary end point was between-group difference in least-squares mean (LSM) change from baseline to month 3 in 24-hour mean ambulatory SBP. Of 394 randomized patients, 377 (302 receiving zilebesiran and 75 receiving placebo) comprised the full analysis set (93 Black patients [24.7%]; 167 [44.3%] women; mean [SD] age, 57 [11] years). At 3 months, 24-hour mean ambulatory SBP changes from baseline were -7.3 mm Hg (95% CI, -10.3 to -4.4) with zilebesiran, 150 mg, once every 6 months; -10.0 mm Hg (95% CI, -12.0 to -7.9) with zilebesiran, 300 mg, once every 3 months or every 6 months; -8.9 mm Hg (95% CI, -11.9 to -6.0) with zilebesiran, 600 mg, once every 6 months; and 6.8 mm Hg (95% CI, 3.6-9.9) with placebo. LSM differences vs placebo in change from baseline to month 3 were -14.1 mm Hg (95% CI, -19.2 to -9.0; P < .001) with zilebesiran, 150 mg, once every 6 months; -16.7 mm Hg (95% CI, -21.2 to -12.3; P < .001) with zilebesiran, 300 mg, once every 3 months or every 6 months; and -15.7 mm Hg (95% CI, -20.8 to -10.6; P < .001) with zilebesiran, 600 mg, once every 6 months. Over 6 months, 60.9% of patients receiving zilebesiran had adverse events vs 50.7% patients receiving placebo and 3.6% had serious adverse events vs 6.7% receiving placebo. Nonserious drug-related adverse events occurred in 16.9% of zilebesiran-treated patients (principally injection site reactions and mild hyperkalemia) and 8.0% of placebo-treated patients. In adults with mild to moderate hypertension, treatment with zilebesiran across a range of doses at 3-month or 6-month intervals significantly reduced 24-hour mean ambulatory SBP at month 3. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04936035.

Effect of Tai Chi vs Aerobic Exercise on Blood Pressure in Patients With Prehypertension

Prehypertension increases the risk of developing hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases. Early and effective intervention for patients with prehypertension is highly important. To assess the efficacy of Tai Chi vs aerobic exercise in patients with prehypertension. This prospective, single-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted between July 25, 2019, and January 24, 2022, at 2 tertiary public hospitals in China. Participants included 342 adults aged 18 to 65 years with prehypertension, defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 120 to 139 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) of 80 to 89 mm Hg. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a Tai Chi group (n = 173) or an aerobic exercise group (n = 169). Both groups performed four 60-minute supervised sessions per week for 12 months. The primary outcome was SBP at 12 months obtained in the office setting. Secondary outcomes included SBP at 6 months and DBP at 6 and 12 months obtained in the office setting and 24-hour ambulatory BP at 12 months. Of the 1189 patients screened, 342 (mean [SD] age, 49.3 [11.9] years; 166 men [48.5%] and 176 women [51.5%]) were randomized to 1 of 2 intervention groups: 173 to Tai Chi and 169 to aerobic exercise. At 12 months, the change in office SBP was significantly different between groups by -2.40 (95% CI, -4.39 to -0.41) mm Hg (P = .02), with a mean (SD) change of -7.01 (10.12) mm Hg in the Tai Chi group vs -4.61 (8.47) mm Hg in the aerobic exercise group. The analysis of office SBP at 6 months yielded similar results (-2.31 [95% CI, -3.94 to -0.67] mm Hg; P = .006). Additionally, 24-hour ambulatory SBP (-2.16 [95% CI, -3.84 to -0.47] mm Hg; P = .01) and nighttime ambulatory SBP (-4.08 [95% CI, -6.59 to -1.57] mm Hg; P = .002) were significantly reduced in the Tai Chi group compared with the aerobic exercise group. In this study including patients with prehypertension, a 12-month Tai Chi intervention was more effective than aerobic exercise in reducing SBP. These findings suggest that Tai Chi may help promote the prevention of cardiovascular disease in populations with prehypertension. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR1900024368.

Effect of vitamin B2, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E and folic acid in adults with essential hypertension: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

ObjectivesThe objective of the current study is to compare the treatment effects of different vitamins on essential hypertension to provide an initial basis for developing evidence-based practices.DesignSystematic review and network...

Agreement Between Guideline Thresholds Using an "All-in-One" Device to Measure Office, Home, and Ambulatory Blood Pressures.

Blood pressure (BP) thresholds for diagnosing and managing hypertension vary for office, home, and ambulatory readings, and between guideline documents. This analysis determined corresponding office, home, and ambulatory BP thresholds using baseline data from the HI-JAMP (Home-Activity Information and Communication Technology-Based Japan Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Prospective) study, which used a validated "all-in-one" BP monitoring device. Data from 2322 treated patients with hypertension who underwent office BP measurement, then 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring, then home BP monitoring for 5 days were analyzed. Corresponding BP thresholds for office, home, and ambulatory measurements were determined using Deming regression. Values equivalent to office systolic BP (SBP) of 120 and 140 mm Hg were as follows: 115.9 and 127.7 mm Hg for 24-hour ambulatory SBP; 120.8 and 134.0 mm Hg for daytime ambulatory SBP; 104.9 and 117.9 mm Hg for nighttime ambulatory SBP; and 122.0 and 134.2 mm Hg for morning-evening average home SBP. Deming regression showed that morning-evening average home SBP and daytime ambulatory SBP were almost the same (home SBP=0.99×daytime ambulatory SBP+0.27 mm Hg; r=0.627). Morning-evening average home SBP values of 120 and 135 mm Hg were equivalent to daytime ambulatory SBP values of 119.1 and 133.9 mm Hg, respectively. A home SBP threshold of 130 mm Hg corresponded to 24-hour and nighttime ambulatory SBP values of 123.5 and 113.6 mm Hg, whereas a home SBP threshold of 135 mm Hg corresponded to 24-hour and nighttime ambulatory SBP values of 128.0 and 119.2 mm Hg. Ambulatory and home BP thresholds in this analysis were similar to those proposed by existing guidelines. The similarity between the home BP and daytime ambulatory BP thresholds was a clinically relevant finding.

Effect of Dietary Sodium on Blood Pressure

Dietary sodium recommendations are debated partly due to variable blood pressure (BP) response to sodium intake. Furthermore, the BP effect of dietary sodium among individuals taking antihypertensive medications is understudied. To examine the distribution of within-individual BP response to dietary sodium, the difference in BP between individuals allocated to consume a high- or low-sodium diet first, and whether these varied according to baseline BP and antihypertensive medication use. Prospectively allocated diet order with crossover in community-based participants enrolled between April 2021 and February 2023 in 2 US cities. A total of 213 individuals aged 50 to 75 years, including those with normotension (25%), controlled hypertension (20%), uncontrolled hypertension (31%), and untreated hypertension (25%), attended a baseline visit while consuming their usual diet, then completed 1-week high- and low-sodium diets. High-sodium (approximately 2200 mg sodium added daily to usual diet) and low-sodium (approximately 500 mg daily total) diets. Average 24-hour ambulatory systolic and diastolic BP, mean arterial pressure, and pulse pressure. Among the 213 participants who completed both high- and low-sodium diet visits, the median age was 61 years, 65% were female and 64% were Black. While consuming usual, high-sodium, and low-sodium diets, participants' median systolic BP measures were 125, 126, and 119 mm Hg, respectively. The median within-individual change in mean arterial pressure between high- and low-sodium diets was 4 mm Hg (IQR, 0-8 mm Hg; P < .001), which did not significantly differ by hypertension status. Compared with the high-sodium diet, the low-sodium diet induced a decline in mean arterial pressure in 73.4% of individuals. The commonly used threshold of a 5 mm Hg or greater decline in mean arterial pressure between a high-sodium and a low-sodium diet classified 46% of individuals as "salt sensitive." At the end of the first dietary intervention week, the mean systolic BP difference between individuals allocated to a high-sodium vs a low-sodium diet was 8 mm Hg (95% CI, 4-11 mm Hg; P < .001), which was mostly similar across subgroups of age, sex, race, hypertension, baseline BP, diabetes, and body mass index. Adverse events were mild, reported by 9.9% and 8.0% of individuals while consuming the high- and low-sodium diets, respectively. Dietary sodium reduction significantly lowered BP in the majority of middle-aged to elderly adults. The decline in BP from a high- to low-sodium diet was independent of hypertension status and antihypertensive medication use, was generally consistent across subgroups, and did not result in excess adverse events. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04258332.

Abstract 14531: Higher Urban Health Index is Associated With Lower Ambulatory Blood Pressure in People Living in Southeast United States

Introduction: Hypertension is common in the Southeastern (SE) United States (US), which increases the risk of heart attack, stroke and other serious health problems. Ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring is the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension and provides better information on cardio- and cerebrovascular risk than office blood pressure (BP). However, the role of social determinants of health (SDOH) and their influence on BP elevation has been scarcely examined on a neighborhood level. The Urban Health Index (UHI), developed by the World Health Organization, has the potential to measure disparities in SDOH at the small areal level and examine inequalities in health outcomes. Hypothesis: Higher UHI is associated with lower blood pressure. Methods: We analyzed data using a longitudinal cohort established in 1989 with 724 individuals (age 5-16 in 1989, 50.8% females, 47.1% African Americans) from the Central Savannah River Area. A census tract level UHI was calculated using indicators of employment, income, and educational attainment. The UHI is a unitless and continuous measure (between 0 and 1). The relationship between UHI (2000 and 2010 data) and ABP was examined using a linear regression model, adjusted for age, sex, race, and family socioeconomic status. Results: Higher UHI was associated with lower ABP, with a 3.15 mmHg and 2.72 mmHg drop in 24-hour systolic and diastolic ABP with 1 unit increase in UHI, respectively (2000 data; p=0.010; p=0.020). The 2010 data showed similar trends, with an increase in UHI linked to a 2.66 mmHg decrease in mean 24-hour systolic ABP (P=0.042), with the diastolic ABP reduction (1.74 mmHg) in the same direction though not statistically significant (p=0.088). Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to delineate the correlation of ABP with UHI. Our results show that a higher UHI is associated with lower systolic and diastolic ABP, underscoring the influence of aggregate indicators of SDOH on individual health outcomes. Our results support the utility of the UHI as a tool to inform health policymakers on disparities on a sub-county level thereby informing targeted interventions to address these disparities.

Abstract 13660: Endovascular Ultrasound Renal Denervation for Resistant Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials

Background: Radiofrequency renal denervation (RDN) is used as a treatment for resistant hypertension, although its efficacy is still under evaluation. Similarly, ultrasound RDN, a less invasive technique, has yielded inconsistent results in this population. Hypothesis: Ultrasound RDN may lower blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension. Aims: To compare the efficacy of ultrasound RDN versus a sham procedure in treating resistant hypertension. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase in May 2023 to include randomized sham-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of ultrasound RDN. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4.1 using generic inverse variance weighting to pool mean ± standard deviation and least square mean ± standard error. Results: We included three studies comprising 323 patients with resistant hypertension on ≥ three antihypertensive medications, of whom 51.7% were randomized to RDN. Follow-up at analysis ranged from 8 to 24 weeks. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of change from baseline in 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP; MD -2.15 mmHg; 95% -5.07, 0.76; p=0.15; Fig. 1A), 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (DBP; MD -1.19 mmHg; 95% CI -2.91, 0.53; p=0.18; Fig. 1B) or office SBP (MD -1.71 mmHg; 95% CI -9.62, 6.20; p=0.67; Fig. 1C). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, ultrasound RDN did not significantly reduce blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension as compared with a sham procedure.

Safety and Efficacy of Renal Denervation in Patients Taking Antihypertensive Medications

BackgroundRenal denervation (RDN) reduces blood pressure (BP) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the absence of antihypertensive medications. ObjectivesThis trial assessed the safety and efficacy of RDN in the presence of antihypertensive medications. MethodsSPYRAL HTN-ON MED is a prospective, randomized, sham-controlled, patient- and assessor-blinded trial enrolling patients from 56 clinical centers worldwide. Patients were prescribed 1 to 3 antihypertensive medications. Patients were randomized to radiofrequency RDN or sham control procedure. The primary efficacy endpoint was the baseline-adjusted change in mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP at 6 months between groups using a Bayesian trial design and analysis. ResultsThe treatment difference in the mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to 6 months between the RDN group (n = 206; −6.5 ± 10.7 mm Hg) and sham control group (n = 131; −4.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg) was −1.9 mm Hg (95% CI: −4.4 to 0.5 mm Hg; P = 0.12). There was no significant difference between groups in the primary efficacy analysis with a posterior probability of superiority of 0.51 (Bayesian treatment difference: −0.03 mm Hg [95% CI: −2.82 to 2.77 mm Hg]). However, there were changes and increases in medication intensity among sham control patients. RDN was associated with a reduction in office systolic BP compared with sham control at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference: −4.9 mm Hg; P = 0.0015). Night-time BP reductions and win ratio analysis also favored RDN. There was 1 adverse safety event among 253 assessed patients. ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between groups in the primary analysis. However, multiple secondary endpoint analyses favored RDN over sham control. (SPYRAL HTN-ON MED Study [Global Clinical Study of Renal Denervation With the Symplicity Spyral Multi-electrode Renal Denervation System in Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension in the Absence of Antihypertensive Medications]; NCT02439775)

Efficacy and Safety Comparative of Sacubitril/Valsartan vs. Olmesartan in the Treatment of hypertension: A Meta-analysis of RCTs.

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) is a widely used drug for hypertension in Asia, popular for its efficacy and safety. However, there has been no comprehensive literature review comparing it with olmesartan. This meta-analysis compared the antihypertensive and adverse effects of sacubitril/valsartan and olmesartan. We conducted a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The data were then analyzed and processed using Revman 5.4 and Stata SE14 software. Six RCTs with 4,127 patients were identified, showing that LCZ696 had better blood pressure control than olmesartan; mean sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, sitting pulse pressure, 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure, and 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure were significantly decreased with LCZ696 compared with olmesartan. No significant difference between LCZ696 and olmesartan was observed in the occurrence of the majority of adverse events, with a decreased probability of headache in patients with sacubitril/valsartan compared with olmesartan. The subgroup analysis showed treatment with 400 mg/d LCZ696 was better than olmesartan in reducing serious adverse events. Sacubitril/valsartan was better than olmesartan in controlling blood pressure in patients with hypertension, with relatively higher safety.