Blood Pressure Control In Patients Research Articles

The Association Between Antihypertensive Medication and Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

Obstructive sleep apnea and hypertension are closely related diseases. The lowering effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on blood pressure (BP) control is modest and concomitant antihypertensive therapy is still required. However, the best antihypertensive regimen for BP control in patients with OSA remains unknown. We aimed to investigate a hypothetical association between ongoing antihypertensive medication and BP control rates in patients with OSA. We conducted a prospective observational study in a cohort of 205 patients with OSA and hypertension who underwent a sleep study and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). Ongoing antihypertensive medication profile was recorded. Logistic regression models were used to investigate the association between antihypertensive regimen and BP control, before (n = 205) and, when applicable, after CPAP adaptation (n = 90). One hundred and fifty-five patients (155/205) were being treated with 31 different antihypertensive regimens. At baseline, the antihypertensive regimens and the number of antihypertensive drugs were not associated with BP control (p = 0.847; p = 0.991). After CPAP adaptation, a decrease in median night-time systolic and diastolic BP was observed (p = 0.001; p = 0.006). Nevertheless, the lack of association between antihypertensive regimens and the number of antihypertensive drugs and BP control remained (p = 0.864; p = 0.800). Our findings confirm that although CPAP improves nocturnal BP, this improvement is not sufficient to control blood pressure for 24 h. This study shows, for the first time, that in patients with OSA, there is no association between BP control and both the antihypertensive regimen and the number of antihypertensive drugs.

Calcium channel blockers and hypertension.

Effective treatment of high blood pressure (BP) represents a key strategy for reducing the burden of hypertension-related cardiovascular and renal diseases. In spite of these well-established concepts, hypertension remains poorly controlled worldwide. In order to improve BP control in patients with hypertension, several interventions have been proposed, among which (1) preferred use of more effective, sustained, and well-tolerated antihypertensive drug aimed to ensure adherence to prescribed medications and (2) extensive use of rational, integrated, and synergistic combination therapies, even as first-line strategy, aimed to achieve the recommended BP targets. Within the possible antihypertensive drug classes currently available for the clinical management of hypertension, both in monotherapy and in combination therapy, drugs inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) have demonstrated to be effective and safe in lowering BP levels and achieving the recommended BP targets with a good tolerability profile. In particular, CCBs have been one of the most widely used classes of antihypertensive agents in the last 20 years, based on their effectiveness in reducing BP levels, good tolerability, and abundant evidence on reducing cardiovascular and renal consequences of hypertension. This article provides an updated overview of the evidence supporting the use of CCBs-based antihypertensive regimen, both in monotherapy and in combination therapies with different classes of antihypertensive drugs.

Identifying predictors of blood pressure control in the Lebanese population - a national, multicentric survey -- I-PREDICT.

BackgroundBlood Pressure (BP) is not well controlled and factors that predict BP control are not well identified in Lebanon. Improvement of hypertension management requires an understanding of patients’ characteristics and factors associated with uncontrolled BP. This national, multicentric, observational prospective study was designed to determine the predictors of BP control in patients followed up to 6 months.MethodsI-PREDICT study was conducted on 988 patients with newly diagnosed or uncontrolled hypertension. Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed. The level of agreement between doctors’ perceptions on BP control status and JNC VII guidelines was analyzed.ResultsThe predictor associated with poor BP control was diabetes (OR = 0.17, CI = 0.10–0.28 at month-1; OR = 0.15, CI = 0.10–0.24 at month-6). The predictors associated with better BP control at month-6 were the early control of BP at month-1 (OR = 10.39, CI = 6.18–17.47) and combination therapy prescribed at baseline and month-1 (OR = 15.14, CI = 1.09–208.46, P = 0.04). In the sub-group of diabetes, the predictors that were associated with better BP control at 6 months were following diet at V1 (OR = 2.27, CI = 1.01 to 5.12) and BP control at V2 (OR = 7.34, CT = 3.83 to 14.07). The predictors that were associated with poor BP control at 6 months were middle economic class (OR = 0.036, CI = 0.16-0.94) and upper economic class (OR = 0.036; CI = 0.13-0.93).The rate of BP control was significantly higher at month 6 versus month 1 (67.52% vs 44.08%, P = 0.001). Additional analysis showed poor agreement between the doctors’ perceptions on BP control status and the guidelines.ConclusionsReaching an early BP control and combination therapy were significant predictors of better BP control, whereas diabetes was a significant predictor of poor BP control. A poor agreement between JNC VII guidelines and clinical practice was observed. I-PREDICT study identified factors that can be targeted for improving BP control.

Clevidipine: a review of its use for managing blood pressure in perioperative and intensive care settings.

The ultrashort-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist clevidipine (Cleviprex(®)) has a rapid onset and offset of effect and reduces blood pressure (BP) by decreasing arteriolar resistance without affecting venous capacitance vessels. This article reviews the clinical efficacy and tolerability of intravenous clevidipine when used to manage BP in perioperative and intensive care settings, as well as summarizing its pharmacological properties. Intravenous clevidipine effectively treated preoperative and postoperative hypertension in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, according to the results of the randomized, multicentre, double-blind, phase III ESCAPE-1 and ESCAPE-2 trials. The randomized, open-label, multicentre, phase III ECLIPSE trials indicated that in terms of keeping systolic BP within the target range, clevidipine was more effective than nitroglycerin or sodium nitroprusside perioperatively and had similar efficacy to nicardipine postoperatively in cardiac surgery patients. In small, double-blind trials in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery, perioperative clevidipine was noninferior to nitroglycerin, and postoperative clevidipine had similar efficacy to sodium nitroprusside. Noncomparative studies demonstrated that clevidipine provided rapid BP control in patients with acute neurological injuries (including intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage and acute ischaemic stroke), and was not associated with 'overshoot' in the vast majority of patients. Intravenous clevidipine was generally well tolerated and was usually associated with no reflex tachycardia or only very modest increases in heart rate. In conclusion, intravenous clevidipine is a valuable agent for the management of BP in perioperative and intensive care settings.

Total Body Water and Failure to Control Blood Pressure by Medication in Hemodialysis Patients

Background: Volume overload is the main factor responsible for the pathogenesis of hypertension in dialysis patients. Few studies have evaluated the interpretation of the parameters obtained by bioelectrical impedance (BIA) to manage these patients. The aim of this study was to assess the best cutoff level of volume overload obtained by BIA able to predict the absence of hypertension control in hemodialysis patients. Methods: Volume overload was calculated as the difference between total body water (TBW) measured by bioimpedance and TBW estimated by the Watson formula in chronic stable hemodialysis patients. Inadequate control of blood pressure (BP) was defined as the mean of measurements obtained before five hemodialysis sessions ≥140 × 90 mm Hg. The best cutoff level of volume overload assessed by BIA able to predict the absence of BP control in patients on chronic hemodialysis was determined by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve using the Youden method. Results: We included 205 patients, 53% male, aged 56 ± 14.5 years. The largest area under the ROC curve was found for predialysis volume overload (0.660, 95% CI 0.556-0.765, p = 0.004). The ROC curve of postdialysis volume overload also reaches statistical significance. The best cutoff point was found for predialysis volume overload ≥1.4 liters with a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 67%. Conclusion: The association of TBW and inadequate BP control highlights the importance of volume management in hemodialysis patients. Predialysis volume overload of 1.4 liters was the parameter that best discriminated the presence of inadequate BP control.

Counseling African Americans to Control Hypertension

Background— Data are limited on the implementation of evidence-based multilevel interventions targeted at blood pressure (BP) control in hypertensive blacks who receive care in low-resource primary care practices. Methods and Results— Counseling African Americans to Control Hypertension is a cluster-randomized clinical trial in which 30 community health centers were randomly assigned to the intervention condition (IC) or usual care (UC). Patients at the IC sites received patient education, home BP monitoring, and monthly lifestyle counseling, whereas physicians attended monthly hypertension case rounds and received feedback on their patients’ home BP readings and chart audits. Patients and physicians at the UC sites received printed patient education material and hypertension treatment guidelines, respectively. The primary outcome was BP control, and secondary outcomes were mean changes in systolic and diastolic BPs at 12 months, assessed with an automated BP device. A total of 1059 patients (mean age, 56 years; 28% men, 59% obese, and 36% with diabetes mellitus) were enrolled. The BP control rate was similar in both groups (IC=49.3% versus UC=44.5%; odds ratio, 1.21 [95% confidence interval, 0.90–1.63]; P =0.21). In prespecified subgroup analyses, the intervention was associated with greater BP control in patients without diabetes mellitus (IC=54.0% versus UC=44.7%; odds ratio, 1.45 [confidence interval, 1.02–2.06]); and small-sized community health centers (IC=51.1% versus UC=39.6%; odds ratio, 1.45 [confidence interval, 1.04–2.45]). Conclusions— A practice-based, multicomponent intervention was no better than UC in improving BP control among hypertensive blacks. Future research on the implementation of behavioral modification strategies for hypertension control in low-resource settings should focus on the development of more efficient and tailored interventions in this high-risk population. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00233220.

Self-monitoring of blood pressure for improving adherence to antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure control: a randomized controlled trial.

Self-monitoring is reported to have limited efficacy for hypertension management in high-income countries. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of self-monitoring on blood pressure (BP) control in an Iranian population. A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 196 mild to moderate hypertensive patients in an outpatient cardiovascular clinic. Patients in the intervention group received a wrist self-monitoring device and were educated to measure and document their BP daily during the study period (24 weeks). Patients in the control group received usual care. Three follow-up visits with the physician were scheduled for all patients (weeks 4, 12, and 24), and the investigator assessed adherence to medications after each visit (pill counting). The primary outcome (BP) was compared between groups using repeated-measure analysis of variance. One hundred ninety patients completed the study. Systolic BP (144.4±7.4 vs 145.9±6.4mm Hg) and diastolic BP (85.5±6.9 vs. 85.1±7.7mm Hg) were similar between groups at baseline. The trend of BP was not significantly different between groups during the study period. Systolic and diastolic BP decreased significantly in both groups at the first follow-up visit (systolic BP: 132.6 vs. 133.4mm Hg; diastolic BP: 77.4 vs. 77.2mm Hg). In the intervention group, we observed a small continued decrease in diastolic BP up to week 24 BP (P = 0.01). Both groups showed adherence rates >95% during the study period. Our study could not confirm that self-monitoring can improve BP control in patients with frequent medical visits.

High prevalence of masked uncontrolled hypertension in people with treated hypertension

There are limited data on the quality of treated blood pressure (BP) control during normal daily life, and in particular, the prevalence of 'masked uncontrolled hypertension' (MUCH) in people with treated and seemingly well-controlled BP is unknown. This is important because masked hypertension in 'treatment naïve' patients is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular events. We therefore conducted the first study to define the prevalence and characteristics of MUCH among a large sample of hypertensive patients in routine clinical practice in whom BP was treated and controlled to recommended clinic BP goals. We analysed data from the Spanish Society of Hypertension ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) Registry and identified patients with treated and controlled BP according to current international guidelines (clinic BP <140/90 mmHg). Masked uncontrolled hypertension was diagnosed in these patients if despite controlled clinic BP, the mean 24-h ABPM average remained elevated (24-h systolic BP ≥130 mmHg and/or 24-h diastolic BP ≥80 mmHg). From 62 788 patients with treated BP in the Spanish registry, we identified 14 840 with treated and controlled clinic BP, of whom 4608 patients (31.1%) had MUCH according to 24-h ABPM criteria (mean age 59.4 years, 59.7% men). The prevalence of MUCH was significantly higher in males, patients with borderline clinic BP (130-9/80-9 mmHg), and patients at high cardiovascular risk (smokers, diabetes, obesity). Masked uncontrolled hypertension was most often because of poor control of nocturnal BP, with the proportion of patients in whom MUCH was solely attributable to an elevated nocturnal BP almost double that solely attributable to daytime BP elevation (24.3 vs. 12.9%, P < 0.001). The prevalence of masked suboptimal BP control in patients with treated and well-controlled clinic BP is high. Clinic BP monitoring alone is thus inadequate to optimize BP control because many patients have an elevated nocturnal BP. These findings suggest that ABPM should become more routine to confirm BP control, especially in higher risk groups and/or those with borderline control of clinic BP.

Analysis of correlation between 24-hour urinary sodium and the degree of blood pressure control in patients with chronic kidney disease and non-chronic kidney disease.

We investigated the association between 24-hr urinary sodium (24UNA) and adequacy of blood pressure (BP) control in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and nonCKD. All data were collected retrospectively by accessing the electrical medical records in patients with 24-hr urine collection and serum creatinine. Enrolled 400 subjects were subgrouped by the amount of 24UNA, or CKD stage. The appropriate BP was defined as BP < 130/80 mmHg for subjects with proteinuria, and BP < 140/90 mmHg for subjects without proteinuria. The mean level of 24UNA was 166±76 mEq/day. The 24UNA group was an independently related factor to diastolic BP as a continuous variable. The rate of appropriate BP control in patients with proteinuria was highest in 24UNA <100 mEq/L (P=0.012). The odds to fail achievement of BP target in subjects with 24UNA≥90 mEq/day was 2.441 (1.249-4.772, P=0.009) higher than that of 24UNA <90 mEq/day among participants with proteinuria. There was difference in the amount of 24UNA between CKD and non-CKD except each stage of CKD group. In conclusion, salt intake estimated by 24-hr urine sodium excretion is a risk factor to achieve appropriate BP control.

Adherence and health care costs with single-pill fixed-dose combinations in hypertension management.

There have been major advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment of hypertension; however, blood pressure (BP) control in the United States remains suboptimal. Data from the latest National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) indicate that 33% of U.S. adults 20 years of age and older have hypertension. Of these, only 82% are aware that they have hypertension, and only 53% have hypertension adequately controlled. One important consequence of these suboptimal control rates is an increase in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, which has a substantial impact on both medical resource utilization and overall health care costs. Annual direct medical costs attributable to hypertension are projected to increase from $70 billion to $200 billion (a 186% increase) between 2010 and 2030. Furthermore, if the definition of hypertension-attributable costs is expanded to include the hypertension component of associated cardiovascular disorders, such as heart failure, coronary heart disease, and stroke, the increase in annual spending from 2010 to 2030 is $258 billion, with the overall direct cost rising to $389 billion by 2030. Consequently, cost-effective improvement in the management of hypertension is crucial. Data from large clinical trials demonstrate that it is possible to achieve adequate BP control in patients with hypertension. However, since the pathogenesis of hypertension is typically multifactorial and involves counterregulatory mechanisms, it is frequently difficult to achieve this control using therapy directed at a single factor or mechanism. In most clinical trials, adequate BP control was achieved only when combination therapy involving 2 or more antihypertensive agents was employed. These findings have led the American Society of Hypertension to conclude that at least 75% of patients with hypertension will require 2 or more antihypertensive agents in order to achieve contemporary BP targets. Moreover, it is estimated that at least 25% of patients with hypertension will require 3 or more agents in order to achieve these targets. Single-pill fixed-dose antihypertensive combination therapy simplifies the treatment regimen and may thus provide a convenient treatment option for patients. Such therapy has been shown to be significantly more effective in achieving BP control at 1 year than either free-drug combination therapy (i.e., multiple-pill therapy) or monotherapy. Because some single-pill fixed-dose combination therapies for hypertension are available only as brand-name drugs, drug costs may be COMMENTARY

Changes in blood-pressure control among patients with hypertension from 2008 through 2011: surveys of actual clinical practice.

We performed cross-sectional surveys to investigate changes in clinical practices regarding blood-pressure control in patients with hypertension from 2008 through 2011. Questionnaires regarding the care of patients with hypertension were mailed to members of the Kanagawa Physicians Association in Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan. Data were obtained on 675 patients in 2008, 332 in 2009, and 1,076 in 2011. The mean systolic blood pressure (BP) was significantly lower in 2011 than in 2008 (132.2±11.9 mm Hg versus 134.6±10.6 mm Hg). The office-measured target BP, according to the 2009 guidelines of the Japanese Society of Hypertension for the management of patients with hypertension, was achieved in 53.9% of patients in 2008, 55.1% in 2009, and 57.1% in 2011. In nonelderly patients (younger than 65 years), the achievement rate was significantly greater in 2011 (41.2%) than in 2008 (23.6%). This analysis showed that the factor most significantly associated with a decrease in office-measured BP was treatment with a larger number and higher doses of antihypertensive agents. To investigate changes in clinical practices according to the guidelines, further follow-up surveys are necessary.

Control de la presión arterial en pacientes en tratamiento con terapia combinada

Background and aimThe impact of antihypertensive treatment on blood pressure (BP) control is fairly unknown. The aim of the study was to evaluate the degree of BP control and its relationship with treatment-related factors in hypertensive patients treated with 2 or 3 agents and attended in referral units. Patients and methodsWe studied 1,337 hypertensive subjects (41% women) with a mean age (SD) of 63 (12) years, who were receiving 2 or 3 antihypertensive drugs. The degree of BP control was estimated in a single visit by the proportion of patients with BP below 140/90mmHg. ResultsBP was controlled in 767 patients (57%). Lack of BP control was related to older age (12% risk for each 10-year increase) and the presence of microalbuminuria (64% risk increase). In those treated with 2 agents, BP control was 61%, without differences between those treated with fixed-drug or free combinations. BP control in those treated with 3 agents was 55%, higher in those receiving 3 agents in a fixed-drug combination (68%) compared with those on 3 agents administered separately (52%; P=.025). Drug classes used in combinations did not influence the degree of BP control. ConclusionsThe degree of BP control in patients treated with 2 or 3 agents is 57%. Microalbuminuria is related to a lack of BP control. In those receiving 3 agents, the use of fixed-drug combinations is associated with better BP control.

Changes in Hypertension Treatment in the Yaroslavl Region of Russia: Improvements Observed Between 2 Cross‐Sectional Surveys

This prospective before‐and‐after survey of hypertensive patients visiting government‐run outpatient health facilities in the Yaroslavl Region of Russia assessed blood pressure (BP)–related endpoints following initiation of a comprehensive health system improvement program for hypertension. Two cross‐sectional surveys, one at baseline and the other approximately 1 year after program initiation, evaluated the primary measure of BP control rate. Secondary measures included mean BP levels and distribution, cardiovascular risk factors, and associated conditions, heart rate levels, and antihypertensive therapy. From the 2011 survey (n=1794) to the 2012 survey (n=2992), BP control rate (<140/90 mm Hg) significantly increased from 16.8% to 23.0%, reflecting a 37% relative improvement (P<.0001). Mean BP level was significantly reduced from 151/90 mm Hg to 147/88 mm Hg (P<.0001). Severe uncontrolled hypertension (systolic BP ≥180 mm Hg) was reduced from 9.7% to 6.4% (P<.0001). Implementing a guidelines‐based treatment protocol with medical and patient education programs resulted in physician behavior change and improved patient BP control.

Clinical Implications

Clinical Implications

Effect of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management on blood pressure control: a cluster randomized clinical trial.

Only about half of patients with high blood pressure (BP) in the United States have their BP controlled. Practical, robust, and sustainable models are needed to improve BP control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. To determine whether an intervention combining home BP telemonitoring with pharmacist case management improves BP control compared with usual care and to determine whether BP control is maintained after the intervention is stopped. A cluster randomized clinical trial of 450 adults with uncontrolled BP recruited from 14,692 patients with electronic medical records across 16 primary care clinics in an integrated health system in Minneapolis-St Paul, Minnesota, with 12 months of intervention and 6 months of postintervention follow-up. Eight clinics were randomized to provide usual care to patients (n = 222) and 8 clinics were randomized to provide a telemonitoring intervention (n = 228). Intervention patients received home BP telemonitors and transmitted BP data to pharmacists who adjusted antihypertensive therapy accordingly. Control of systolic BP to less than 140 mm Hg and diastolic BP to less than 90 mm Hg (<130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease) at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes were change in BP, patient satisfaction, and BP control at 18 months (6 months after intervention stopped). At baseline, enrollees were 45% women, 82% white, mean (SD) age was 61.1 (12.0) years, and mean systolic BP was 148 mm Hg and diastolic BP was 85 mm Hg. Blood pressure was controlled at both 6 and 12 months in 57.2% (95% CI, 44.8% to 68.7%) of patients in the telemonitoring intervention group vs 30.0% (95% CI, 23.2% to 37.8%) of patients in the usual care group (P = .001). At 18 months (6 months of postintervention follow-up), BP was controlled in 71.8% (95% CI, 65.0% to 77.8%) of patients in the telemonitoring intervention group vs 57.1% (95% CI, 51.5% to 62.6%) of patients in the usual care group (P = .003). Compared with the usual care group, systolic BP decreased more from baseline among patients in the telemonitoring intervention group at 6 months (-10.7 mm Hg [95% CI, -14.3 to -7.3 mm Hg]; P<.001), at 12 months (-9.7 mm Hg [95% CI, -13.4 to -6.0 mm Hg]; P<.001), and at 18 months (-6.6 mm Hg [95% CI, -10.7 to -2.5 mm Hg]; P = .004). Compared with the usual care group, diastolic BP decreased more from baseline among patients in the telemonitoring intervention group at 6 months (-6.0 mm Hg [95% CI, -8.6 to -3.4 mm Hg]; P<.001), at 12 months (-5.1 mm Hg [95% CI, -7.4 to -2.8 mm Hg]; P<.001), and at 18 months (-3.0 mm Hg [95% CI, -6.3 to 0.3 mm Hg]; P = .07). Home BP telemonitoring and pharmacist case management achieved better BP control compared with usual care during 12 months of intervention that persisted during 6 months of postintervention follow-up. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00781365.

Telemonitoring Results in Better BP Control in Patients with Uncontrolled Hypertension

Telemonitoring-based blood pressure (BP) management involves home readings that are transmitted automatically to healthcare providers. In a randomized

Unilateral Renal Artery Sympathetic Denervation May Reduce Blood Pressure in Patients With Resistant Hypertension

A 29-year-old woman with essential resistant systemic hypertension for 17 years was referred for catheterbased renal sympatethic denervation (RSD). Despite optimal medical therapy including 9 different antihypertensive drugs (thiazides, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, espironolactone, a-agonists, hidralazine, b-blockers, a-blockers, and amiloride), her mean blood pressure (BP) was 142/ 102 mm Hg (ambulatory BP monitoring measurement). The patient was hospitalized for 1 week before the procedure to exclude the diagnosis of pseudo-resistant hypertension. The benefits and complications were explained in detail before signing informed consent. Under conscious sedation, an 8F-long sheath was introduced into the right femoral artery and advanced to the aorta. Bilateral angiography revealed a left renal artery with a diameter of 5.2 mm and length of 10.9 mm and a right renal artery with a diameter of 5.1 mm and a length of 24 mm. A total of 5 lesions were circumferentially applied to the right renal artery with a distance of at least 5 mm between each lesion using an open-irrigated catheter. The duration of each lesion was 60 seconds. Satisfactory impedance drop was observed during each ablation point signifying appropriate tissue heating. At the end of the ablation, dye injection demonstrated signs of dissection most likely due to trauma caused by the long sheath at the ostia. A stent was immediately deployed with success and there were no apparent complications. Given that, in addition to unfavorable left renal artery anatomy, the decision was made to stop the procedure. The catheters were removed and manual compression was carried out. The patient was discharged 3 days later in stable condition and on 2 antihypertensive drugs. At 1-month follow-up, one more antihypertensive agent was added to the therapy (BP = 146/106 mm Hg). Ambulatory BP monitoring at 3 months demonstrated a mean BP of 133/ 82 mm Hg. At 6 months, the patient was still taking 3 medications, and mean BP was 132/78 mm Hg (Table). Renal angiography at 6 months revealed patent stent and no renal artery abnormalities. DISCUSSION This unique case suggests that unilateral catheter-based RSD may reduce BP in patients with resistant hypertension. Radiofrequency catheter ablation has been used for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias for several decades. Recent studies have shown benefits of catheterbased RSD as an alternative strategy for BP control in patients with resistant chronic hypertension. Lesion formation depends on several factors such as proper electrode-tissue contact, power and duration applied, and type of catheter used, among others. In several clinical settings such as left ventricular tachycardia ablation, it is crucial to generate lesions deeply enough to penetrate into the myocardial tissue. However, excessive electrode tip temperature may lead to coagulum and char formation, which limits power delivery. That being said, many efforts have been undertaken in order to optimize power delivery into the myocardial tissue without exceeding electrode tip temperature. Irrigation of the catheter tip has been developed and is now a well-established method to enhance the depth of tissue penetration of radiofrequency energy without causing excessive electrode tip temperature, and therefore enlarging lesion size. Considering the location of the renal nerves deep into the adventitia, we hypothesized that the use of irrigated catheters could be more beneficial than solid-tip catheters in this setting. This could explain the better results observed in this case compared with previous published data. 1 On the other hand, our results are consistent with the publication of Ahmed and colleagues in which 10 patients with resistant hypertension underwent bilateral RSD with a saline-irrigated radiofrequency catheter. The authors showed reduction in the systolic/diastolic blood pressure of 21/11 mm Hg. 2 Large studies, however, need to be performed to demonstrate consistent benefit.

Improved perioperative blood pressure control leads to reduced hospital costs

Background: Perioperative hypertension affects 80% of cardiac surgery patients and is associated with an increased risk of complications.Objective: To determine the relationship between perioperative blood pressure (BP) control and hospital costs for cardiac surgery in the United States (US) and estimate the potential cost reductions associated with effective therapies.Methods: The analysis estimated hospitalization costs (2011 US dollars (USD)) for cardiac surgery when BP was controlled with intravenous (IV) antihypertensives. Patient characteristics, hospital length of stay, and clinical event rates during the initial hospitalization and post-discharge 30 days after study drug infusion were based on the ECLIPSE (Evaluation of CLevidipine In the Perioperative Treatment of Hypertension Assessing Safety Events) trials. These clinical trial data were combined with data from the Massachusetts Acute Hospital Case Mix Database 2007 – 2009 (MA Case Mix Database) to estimate total hospitalization costs.Results: Effective perioperative BP control in patients requiring IV antihypertensives was associated with a 7% decrease in hospital costs compared with less effective BP control. Reductions in total hospital costs associated with clevidipine versus other IV antihypertensives averaged $394 per patient overall. Cost savings with clevidipine exceeded $500 per patient versus sodium nitroprusside and nitroglycerin, but only $22 compared to nicardipine.Conclusion: Improved perioperative BP control may reduce hospital costs. Given the low cost of IV antihypertensives, the total hospital cost reductions may offset any incremental cost increases associated with newer, more effective therapies.

Efficacy of an amlodipine/olmesartan treatment algorithm in patients with or without type 2 diabetes and hypertension (a secondary analysis of the BP-CRUSH study)

A prespecified subgroup analysis of an open-label, multicenter, single-arm, dose-titration study is presented. The efficacy and safety of 20-week treatment with an amlodipine (AML)/olmesartan medoxomil (OM)±hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) algorithm were assessed in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were uncontrolled by antihypertensive monotherapy. Eligible patients received AML/OM 5/20 mg for 4 weeks, followed by stepwise uptitration to AML/OM 5/40 mg, AML/OM 10/40 mg, AML/OM 10/40 mg+HCTZ 12.5 mg and AML/OM 10/40 mg+HCTZ 25 mg at 4-week intervals if blood pressure (BP) remained uncontrolled. The primary end point was the achievement of the seated cuff systolic BP (SeSBP) goal (<140 mm Hg, or <130 mm Hg for patients with T2DM) at week 12. Seated cuff BP was significantly reduced from baseline at all titration dose periods. At week 12, the cumulative SeSBP goal was achieved by 57.9% and 80.1% of patients in the T2DM and non-T2DM subgroups, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated, with low rates of peripheral edema. In summary, switching to a treatment algorithm based on AML/OM±HCTZ after failed monotherapy was safe and improved BP control in patients with hypertension and T2DM.

Is It Possible to Manage Hypertension and Evaluate Therapy Without Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring?

In the management of patients with hypertension, blood pressure (BP) has been traditionally measured in the physician's office. The contribution of ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to the management of hypertensive patients has been increasingly recognized through clinical and epidemiological research. Ambulatory BP monitoring can enhance the ability to detect white-coat or masked hypertension, determine the absence of nocturnal dipping status, and evaluate BP control in patients on antihypertensive therapy. Recently, the United Kingdom National Clinical Guideline Centre published guidelines for the clinical management of primary hypertension in adults, recommending the routine use of ABPM to make the initial diagnosis of hypertension. While the advantages of ABPM are apparent from a clinical perspective, its use should be considered in relation to the cost of the equipment, data evaluation, and staff training as well as the possible inconvenience to the patient. In this review, we summarize the clinical importance of ABPM and discuss the current guidelines for establishing the diagnosis of hypertension.