Associations of Blood Pressure Dipping Patterns With Left Ventricular Mass and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Blacks: The Jackson Heart Study

Background: Abnormal diurnal blood pressure (BP), including nondipping patterns, assessed using ambulatory BP monitoring, have been associated with increased cardiovascular risk among white and Asian adults. We examined the associations of BP dipping patterns (dipping, nondipping, and reverse dipping) with cardiovascular target organ damage (left ventricular mass index and left ventricular hypertrophy), among participants from the Jackson Heart Study, an exclusively black population–based cohort. Methods and Results: Analyses included 1015 participants who completed ambulatory BP monitoring and had echocardiography data from the baseline visit. Participants were categorized based on the nighttime to daytime systolic BP ratio into 3 patterns: dipping pattern (≤0.90), nondipping pattern (>0.90 to ≤1.00), and reverse dipping pattern (>1.00). The prevalence of dipping, nondipping, and reverse dipping patterns was 33.6%, 48.2%, and 18.2%, respectively. In a fully adjusted model, which included antihypertensive medication use and clinic and daytime systolic BP, the mean differences in left ventricular mass index between reverse dipping pattern versus dipping pattern was 8.3±2.1 g/m2 (P<0.001) and between nondipping pattern versus dipping pattern was −1.0±1.6 g/m2 (P=0.536). Compared with participants with a dipping pattern, the prevalence ratio for having left ventricular hypertrophy was 1.65 (95% CI, 1.05–2.58) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.63–1.97) for those with a reverse dipping pattern and nondipping pattern, respectively. Conclusions: In this population‐based study of blacks, a reverse dipping pattern was associated with increased left ventricular mass index and a higher prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy. Identification of a reverse dipping pattern on ambulatory BP monitoring may help identify black at increased risk for cardiovascular target organ damage

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Effect of Antiplatelet Therapy on Survival and Organ Support–Free Days in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

International audienc