Documento de la Sociedad Española de Hipertensión-Liga Española para la Lucha contra la Hipertensión Arterial (SEH-LELHA) sobre las guías ACC/AHA 2017 de hipertensión arterial

The American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have recently published their guidelines for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of hypertension in adults. The most controversial issue is the classification threshold at 130/80 mmHg, which will allow a large number of patients to be diagnosed as hypertensive who were previously considered normotensive. Blood pressure (BP) is considered normal (<120 mmHg systolic and <80 mmHg diastolic), elevated (120-129 and <80 mmHg), stage 1 (130-139 or 80-89 mmHg), and stage 2 (≥140 or ≥90 mmHg). Out-of-office BP measurements are recommended to confirm the diagnosis of hypertension and for titration of BP-lowering medication. In management, cardiovascular risk would be determinant since those with grade 1 hypertension and an estimated 10-year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ≥10%, and those with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease and/or diabetes will require pharmacological treatment, the rest being susceptible to non-pharmacological treatment up to the 140/90 mmHg threshold. These recommendations would allow patients with level 1 hypertension and high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to benefit from pharmacological therapies and all patients could also benefit from improved non-pharmacological therapies. However, this approach should be cautious because inadequate BP measurement and/or lack of systematic atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease calculation could lead to overestimation in diagnosing hypertension and to overtreatment. Guidelines are recommendations, not impositions, and the management of hypertension should be individualized, based on clinical decisions, preferences of the patients, and an adequate balance between benefits and risks

Albiglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (Harmony Outcomes): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30–50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515. Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68–0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p&lt;0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (&lt;1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (&lt;1%) deaths in the albiglutide group. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline

Health perception in menopausal women

Mildren Del Sueldo,1,2,* Nieves Martell-Claros,3&ndash;5,* Mar&iacute;a Abad-Cardiel,3&ndash;5 Judith M Zilberman,6&ndash;8 Raul Marchegiani,1,2 Cristina Fern&aacute;ndez-P&eacute;rez9 1Healthy heart program, Municipalidad de Villa Mar&iacute;a, C&oacute;rdoba, Argentina; 2Cardiology Division and Cardiovascular Prevention, Specialty Clinic, Villa Mar&iacute;a, C&oacute;rdoba, Argentina; 3Hypertension Unit, Internal Medicine Service, Hospital Cl&iacute;nico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; 4School of Medicine, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain; 5Research Institute of the San Carlos Clinical Hospital, Madrid, Spain; 6Physiology Course at the School of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Buenos Aires, IQUIMEFA-CONICET, CABA, Argentina; 7Department of Cardiovascular Prevention, Hypertension Unit, Cardiovascular Institute, Buenos Aires (ICBA), CABA, Argentina; 8Cardiology Service, Hypertension Unit, Hospital General de Agudos Dr. Cosme Argerich, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 9Unit of Epidemiology and Clinical Methodology, Preventive Medicine Service, Research Institute of the San Carlos Clinical Hospital, UCM, Madrid, Spain *These authors contributed equally to this work Aim: The aim of this study is to find whether the worsening of health perception was related to the menopausal (MNP) state or to its negative consequences on cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRF) and the presence of depression/anxiety.Methods: In this study, 2,562 women, 1,357 (53%) MNP and 1,205 (47%) non-MNP, were analyzed. Blood pressure, heart rate, body mass index, waist circumference, and depression/anxiety screening using the Hospital Depression/Anxiety Scale (HADS) were measured. We collected a blood sample in fasting state for glycemia, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides. Logistic regression models were fitted with a backward method from the potentially confusing variables of the menopause study groups.Results: Age 49.4 (&plusmn;15.9) years; 10.1% belonged to semi-rural population; 87.5% had children. Regarding the educational level, 22.1% had &lt;5 years of education, 31.3% had between 6 and 7 years, 33.4% had between 8 and 12 years, and 13.2% had &gt;12 years of education. The prevalence of CMRF was significantly higher in MNP women, except for smoking. We did not find any differences in the prevalence of depression or anxiety between MNP and non-MNP women. Health was perceived as worse among MNP women (P&lt;0.05) and patients over 45 years of age than patients younger than 45 years. We found a relationship between the negative health perception with metabolic syndrome, depression, and anxiety, having children, smoking, residing in rural area, and low educational level; nevertheless, it is not correlative with MNP status.Conclusion: Perceived health should be viewed as a multifaceted condition related to social circumstances, and various symptoms in women, including menopause symptoms, but not with MNP state itself. Keywords: menopause, health perception, depression, anxiety, metabolic syndrom

Circulating endothelial-derived apoptotic microparticles and insulin resistance in non-diabetic patients with chronic heart failure

Abstract Background: The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between insulin resistance and apoptotic endothelial-derived microparticles (EMPs) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: The study involved 300 CHF patients (186 males) aged 48–62 years with angiographically proven coronary artery disease and/or previously defined myocardial infarction. Insulin resistance was assessed by the homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). EMPs phenotype was determined by flow cytofluorometry. Results: Depending on HOMA-IR cut-off point (over and &lt;2.77 mmol/L×μU/mL) all patients were divided into two cohorts with (n=171) or without (n=129) IR, respectively. Circulating EMPs were higher in CHF patients with IR than in patients without IR. Interestingly, EMPs were directly related to NYHA functional class of CHF, HOMA-IR, NT-pro-BNP, hs-CRP and BMI. There was a significant association between the level of EMPs and HbA1c, gender (r=0.318, p&lt;0.001 for male), age and smoking. On univariate and multivariate regression analysis we found that the NYHA class of CHF,NT-pro-BNP, hs-CRP, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) appeared to be independent predictors of increased circulatory apoptotic EMPs. The addition of HOMA-IR to the standard model (NYHA class CHF) improved the relative IDI by 19.9% for increased EMPs. For category-free NRI, 10% of events and 24% of non-events were correctly reclassified by the addition of HOMA-IR to the standard model for increased circulating EMPs. Conclusions: IR may be a contributing factor increasing circulating levels of apoptotic EMPs in non-diabetic CHF patients.</jats:p

Spanish Society of Hypertension position statement on the 2017 ACC/AHA hypertension guidelines

The American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have recently published their guidelines for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of hypertension in adults. The most controversial issue is the classification threshold at 130/80 mmHg, which will allow a large number of patients to be diagnosed as hypertensive who were previously considered normotensive. Blood pressure (BP) is considered normal (&lt;120 mmHg systolic and &lt;80 mmHg diastolic), elevated (120-129 and &lt;80 mmHg), stage 1 (130-139 or 80-89 mmHg), and stage 2 (≥140 or ≥90 mmHg). Out-of-office BP measurements are recommended to confirm the diagnosis of hypertension and for titration of BP-lowering medication. In management, cardiovascular risk would be determinant since those with grade 1 hypertension and an estimated 10-year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ≥10%, and those with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease and/or diabetes will require pharmacological treatment, the rest being susceptible to non-pharmacological treatment up to the 140/90 mmHg threshold. These recommendations would allow patients with level 1 hypertension and high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to benefit from pharmacological therapies and all patients could also benefit from improved non-pharmacological therapies. However, this approach should be cautious because inadequate BP measurement and/or lack of systematic atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease calculation could lead to overestimation in diagnosing hypertension and to overtreatment. Guidelines are recommendations, not impositions, and the management of hypertension should be individualized, based on clinical decisions, preferences of the patients, and an adequate balance between benefits and risksEl American College of Cardiology (ACC) y la American Heart Association (AHA) han publicado recientemente la guía para la prevención, detección, evaluación y tratamiento d de la hipertensión arterial (HTA) en adultos. El punto más controvertido es el umbral diagnóstico de 130/80 mmHg, lo cual conlleva diagnosticar HTA en un gran número de personas previamente consideradas no hipertensas. La presión arterial (PA) se clasifica como normal (sistólica < 120 clínicas y diastólica 80 mmHg), elevada (120-129 y <80 mmHg), grado 1 (130-139 o 80-89 mmHg) y grado2 (≥140 o ≥90 mmHg). Se recomienda la medida de PA fuera de la consulta para confirmar el diagnóstico de HTA o para aumentar el tratamiento. En la toma de decisiones sería determinante el riesgo cardiovascular (RCV), ya que precisarían tratamiento farmacológico personas con HTA grado 1 con riesgo a 10 años de enfermedad cardiovascular aterosclerótica ≥10% y aquellas con enfermedad cardiovascular establecida, enfermedad renal crónica y diabetes, siendo el resto susceptibles de medidas no farmacológicas hasta umbrales de 140/90 mmHg. Dichas recomendaciones permitirían a los sujetos con HTA grado 1 y alto RCV beneficiarse de terapias farmacológicas y podrían mejorar las intervenciones no farmacológicas en todos los sujetos. Sin embargo, habría que ser cauteloso ya que sin poder garantizar una toma correcta de PA, ni el cálculo sistemático del RCV, la aplicación de dichos criterios podría sobrestimar el diagnóstico de HTA y suponer un sobretratamiento innecesario. Las guías son recomendaciones, no imposiciones, y el abordaje y manejo de la PA debe ser individualizado, basado en decisiones clínicas, preferencias de los pacientes y en un balance adecuado del beneficio y riesgo al establecer los diferentes objetivos de P