Blood Pressure最新文献

Purpose: Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) is again gaining interest as recent well-designed trials have demonstrated reduced ambulatory blood pressure (BP) after RDN. However, the hemodynamic mechanisms have not been elucidated. We aimed for the first time to investigate the effect of RDN on the "Hallmark of Hypertension" namely increased systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI).

Materials and methods: We investigated SVRI change in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension randomised to RDN (n = 9) or drug adjusted control (n = 9). Treatment-resistant hypertension was defined as office systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg despite ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. True treatment-resistant hypertension was confirmed prior to inclusion with ambulatory daytime systolic BP ≥ 135 mmHg immediately after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs. Hemodynamic variables were recorded with thoracic impedance cardiography at baseline and at three and six months follow-up after RDN. This non-invasive method also guided further tailoring of drug treatment in the control group aiming to normalise hemodynamic variables and BP.

Results: From three to six months follow-up after RDN, SVRI decreased with a median of -611 dyn*s*m²/cm⁵ [IQR -949 to -267] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with a median of -11 mmHg [IQR -21 to -3] (p = 0.02). In the same period, SVRI in the control group was reduced with -674 dyn*s*m²/cm⁵ [IQR -1,309 to -340] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with -15 mmHg [IQR -29 to -6] (p = 0.01). Thus, hemodynamic variables and BP in the two groups normalised in parallel.

Conclusion: Our data suggest that in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic denervation lowers BP by reducing systemic vascular resistance of similar size as in the control group with careful individual selection of antihypertensive drugs and dose titration.

Purpose: The Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) Study investigated the relationship between target office diastolic blood pressure (BP) ≤80, ≤85 or ≤90 mmHg and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in 18,790 patients aged 50-80 years. The home BP sub-study enrolled 926 patients and the aim was to clarify whether the separation into the BP target groups in the office prevailed in the out-of-office setting. The present study aimed to identify variables that characterised masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) and white coat uncontrolled hypertension (WUCH).

Material and methods: The sub-study participants took their home BP when office BP had been up titrated. The cut-off for normal or high BP was set to ≥135/85 mmHg at home and ≥140/90 mmHg in the office. We analysed data by using multivariate and stepwise multivariate logistic regression with home and office BP combinations as the dependent variables.

Results: WUCH was associated with lower body mass index (BMI) (odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95% confident intervals (CIs) 0.88-0.96, p < 0.001). MUCH was associated with smoking (OR 1.89, 95% CIs 1.25-2.86, p = 0.0025) and with lower baseline heart rate (OR 0.98, 95% CIs 0.97-0.99, p = 0.03) and higher BMI (OR 1.03, CIs 1.00-1.06, p = 0.04). MUCH remained associated with smoking (OR 2.76, 95% CIs 1.76-4.35, p < 0.0001) also when using ≥140/90 mmHg as the cut-off for both home and office BP. MUCH was also associated with higher BMI (OR 1.05, 95% CIs 1.01-1.09, p = 0.009) while WUCH was associated with lower BMI (OR 0.93, 95% CIs 0.90-0.97, p = 0.0005) when using ≥140/90 mmHg as a cut-off.

Conclusion: Our data support that 'reversed or masked' treated but uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) is common and constitutes about 25% of treated hypertensive patients. This entity (MUCH) is rather strongly associated with current smoking and overweight while uncontrolled white coat (office) hypertension (WUCH) is associated with lower BMI.

Purpose: Cuffless blood pressure (CL-BP) measurements are believed to be a potentially alternative to cuff-occlusion-based (C-BP) measurement. A new cuffless device was developed for ambulatory BP monitoring. We assessed the accuracy of a new CL-BP device compared to a standard oscillatory C-BP device over the 24 h.

Materials and methods: Eighty-four consecutive patients were included in the study. BP was measured simultaneously by the CL-BP device and by a C-BP device over the 24 h. Calculations included 24 h mean systolic (S) BP, the mean diastolic (D) BP and the heart rate (HR). Correlations between the CL-BP and C-BP measurements were sought using Pearson's correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots.

Results: Using the C-BP device, the 24 h SBP value for the cohort was 125.4 ± 10.9 mmHg (mean ± SD); the corresponding DBP value being 75 ± 8.3 mmHg. Mean SBP/DBP were higher with the CL-BP device, i.e. 131.1 ± 15.9/80.2 ± 9.7 mmHg . The correlation coefficients between the two sets of values were significant (SBP: r = 0.58, DBP: r = 0.65). Better correlations for SBP and DBP were found 1) in patients with BMI > 25 (SBP: r = 0.65, DBP: r = 0.70) compared to those with BMI <25 and 2) in males compared to females (SBP: r = 0.71, DBP: r = 0.77).

Conclusions: In our patients a CL-BP device estimated 24 h mean SBP and DBP differently from the classical oscillometric device, with a moderate correlation. CL-BP measurements were most accurate on male and overweight subjects.

Purpose: Hypertension is the most important risk factor for disease and premature death. Treatment strategies adjusted for cardiovascular risk have been proposed in guidelines, but real-life treatment strategies for patients with newly diagnosed hypertension in Germany are largely unknown. The aim of the study was to analyse initial drug treatment strategies and associated risk status in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension.

Material and methods: In the representative research database of the public health insurance system in Germany (2077899 individuals) we identified patients with newly diagnosed hypertension in 2012 and analysed co-existing cardiovascular co-morbidities and hypertension-mediated organ damage by ICD-codes as qualifiers for high risk. Health insurance billing datasets for redeemed prescriptions were analysed at several time points using ATC-codes.

Results: The incidence of hypertension was 2.6%, 33.6% of the patients were at high risk at diagnosis, mainly due to cardiovascular co-morbidities. Most patients initially received monotherapy (55.4%), of which ACE inhibitors (43.8%) or beta-blockers (32.4%) were the leading drug classes, while 21.7% of patients received no drug therapy during the first year. The treatment strategies of low and high-risk patients resembled each other - high-risk patients also received mostly monotherapy during the first year after diagnosis (53.4%), while 13.7% remained without drug therapy. Combination therapy was the most frequent treatment strategy one year after hypertension diagnosis (40.6%) and in the long term (68.4%).

Conclusion: Initial treatment strategies may not always be stratified according to cardiovascular risk. The majority of patients with hypertension receives initial monotherapy independent of their individual risk. However, combination therapy represents the major form of therapy in the long-term.