Is early and fast blood pressure control important in hypertension management?

Control of blood pressure (BP) in hypertension is recognized as a key measure in the management of cardiovascular (CV) risk and is a cornerstone of preventive strategies. It is not defined, however, whether an initiation of the antihypertensive treatment in the early stages of hypertension (such as prehypertension or high-normal BP), may bring benefits for the long-term prevention of CV events. In addition, it has not been thoroughly addressed the issue whether achievement of a prompt BP reduction in hypertensive patients may contribute to reduce CV damage and events. The aim of this article is to critically examine data from studies exploring these important questions. Our conclusion is that the available evidence, though not very extensive, supports the prevailing benefits associated with early BP control. We also discuss the therapeutic strategies to achieve early control of BP. Finally, we believe that this aspect deserves to be more thoroughly addressed in upcoming international guidelines

Hypertension in the elderly. Which are the blood pressure threshold values?

Managing blood pressure is often difficult in the elderly, not only because of comorbidities, but also due to vascular remodelling and the changes in the renal and endocrine physiology. The structural and functional arterial modifications lead to impaired vessel’s compliance and increased systolic blood pressure (SBP), often with reduction of diastolic blood pressure (DBP)

2007 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of hypertension, from theory to practice: global cardiovascular risk concept.

Clinical evaluation of cardiovascular risk in patients with hypertension is evolving from independently assessing well-known, traditional risk factors (e.g. hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, diabetes mellitus, smoking) towards an integrated, multidisciplinary clinical approach, aimed at determining the global (or total) cardiovascular risk profile in each individual patient for planning early and effective strategies for cardiovascular prevention. A paradigmatic example is provided by hypertension, in which new clinical behaviour implies a shift from focusing only on high blood pressure levels towards a more integrated approach, aimed at identifying and reducing global cardiovascular risk, as is highlighted in the European Guidelines. This approach arises from the acknowledgement that a cluster of cardiovascular risk factors is the rule, rather than the exception in hypertension. In addition, major cardiovascular diseases often develop from a subclinical level, which can be discovered at an early stage, thus providing the opportunity promptly to intercept and treat high-risk patients early. Identification of organ damage and assessment of hypertension-related clinical conditions can further contribute to a more precise definition of an individual total cardiovascular risk profile, and to the decision on when, how and how much to treat patients with hypertension. Implementing a clinical behaviour based on global cardiovascular risk assessment will help to target global cardiovascular risk reduction, while maintaining specific therapeutic goals for individual risk factors. This synergistic approach holds the best promise for treating total cardiovascular risk and reducing the mounting global burden of cardiovascular disease associated with hypertension

Challenging hypertension: How to diagnose and treat resistant hypertension in daily clinical practice

Arterial hypertension is a very complex disease characterized by a sustained rise in systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure (BP) levels and a significantly increased risk of developing major adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Although BP-lowering treatment reduces the hypertension-related burden of disease, BP control continues to be poorly achieved worldwide. A major factor contributing to this therapeutic failure is represented by resistant (or refractory) hypertension. The diagnosis of 'resistant hypertension is very common in clinical practice, yet it is often used to improperly define patients with difficult or challenging forms of hypertension. An incorrect use of this definition by physicians may lead to clinical behaviors that do not help to improve BP control; on the other hand, correct diagnosis of resistant hypertension may facilitate the successful treatment of hypertension. In this article, we will review and discuss the definition, pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic algorithms and potential new therapeutic options for treating resistant hypertension. © 2010 Expert Reviews Ltd

Managing hypertension in cardiology practice according to risk profile.

Cardiologists play a central role in managing hypertensive patients, although recent surveys reveal a marked discrepancy between cardiologists' appreciation of their patients' risk status and the measures taken to reduce that risk. The diagnosis and the management of hypertension, in fact, must be viewed today not in isolation, but as part of a patients' global cardiovascular (CV) risk, resulting from the concomitant presence of a variety of risk factors, organ damage (left ventricular hypertrophy, carotid or peripheral atherosclerosis, microalbuminuria or impaired glomerular filtration rate), and hypertension-related clinical conditions. The choice of timing and the intensity of antihypertensive treatment should be based on blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy and the propensity to favourably impact patient's individual absolute CV disease risk profile. As part of this paradigm shift in CV disease prevention strategy, cardiologists can take several key steps to help improve standards of hypertension control: (i) increase the awareness of total risk management; (ii) initiate an integrated management strategy tailored to the individual patient's global CV risk (e.g. hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, diabetes, age, smoking and gender); (iii) use any elevation in BP as a gateway to begin total risk management and (iv) utilise combination therapies (particularly fixed-dose combinations) to achieve more rapid and persistent BP control and improve patient compliance/persistence with therapy. To help improve standards of hypertension control in the cardiology setting, this review examines the concept of treating hypertension using a global risk assessment approach and proposes effective hypertensive therapy as part of global risk management in patients typically seen in cardiology practice

Olmesartan medoxomil for the treatment of hypertension in children and adolescents

Prevalence of hypertension in children and adolescents has progressively and continuously increased over recent decades. Thus, early and effective control of high blood pressure may be considered an effective therapeutic approach, in order to reduce the burden of hypertension-related cardiovascular disease in future. In the past, due to the absence of prospective, long-term, randomized, controlled clinical trials performed in young hypertensive patients, lifestyle changes have been long seen as the only strategy to reduce high blood pressure levels. More recently, clinical data on the efficacy and safety of five major classes of antihypertensive drugs (including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], beta-blockers, calcium-antagonists, and diuretics) have become available. In particular, these trials demonstrated dose-dependent blood pressure reductions and a good tolerability profile of several ARBs in hypertensive children and adolescents. An overview is provided of the clinical benefits of early detection and prompt intervention of high blood pressure levels, with a closer analysis of recent clinical trials, performed with olmesartan medoxomil in young subjects with hypertension

Rationale for triple fixed-dose combination therapy with an angiotensin II receptor blocker, a calcium channel blocker, and a thiazide diuretic

Hypertension is a growing global health problem, and is predicted to affect 1.56 billion people by 2025. Treatment remains suboptimal, with control of blood pressure achieved in only 20%–35% of patients, and the majority requiring two or more antihypertensive drugs to achieve recommended blood pressure goals. To improve blood pressure control, the European hypertension guidelines recommend that angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are combined with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and/or thiazide diuretics. The rationale for this strategy is based, in part, on their different effects on the renin-angiotensin system, which improves antihypertensive efficacy. Data from a large number of trials support the efficacy of ACEIs or ARBs in combination with CCBs and/or hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). Combining two different classes of antihypertensive drugs has an additive effect on lowering of blood pressure, and does not increase adverse events, with the ARBs showing a tolerability advantage over the ACEIs. Among the different ARBs, olmesartan medoxomil is available as a dual fixed-dose combination with either amlodipine or HCTZ, and the increased blood pressure-lowering efficacy of these two combinations is proven. Triple therapy is required in 15%–20% of treated uncontrolled hypertensive patients, with a renin-angiotensin system blocker, CCB, and thiazide diuretic considered to be a rational combination according to the European guidelines. Olmesartan, amlodipine, and HCTZ are available as a triple fixed-dose combination, and significant blood pressure reductions have been observed with this regimen compared with the possible dual combinations. The availability of these fixed-dose combinations should lead to improvement in blood pressure control and aid compliance with long-term therapy, optimizing the management of this chronic condition

novel blood pressure targets in patients with high normal levels and grade 1 hypertension room for monotherapy

Abstract The 2018 European and 2017 American guidelines recommend to start antihypertensive treatment with combinations of two or more drugs in most hypertensive patients, as a consequence of the suggested more ambitious blood pressure (BP) targets (systolic BP between 130 and 120 mmHg in most patients, diastolic BP between 80 and 70 mmHg). Monotherapy, however, is still suggested as first choice in some specific classes of patients. In this article, we analyze the subgroups of hypertensive patients that should properly started and even maintained on monotherapy, with a focus on subjects with BP in the high-normal range or grade 1 hypertension, young adults with estimated low cardiovascular risk, women during pregnancy or menopause, elderly patients aged >80 years or with frailty parameters. Altogether, these subgroups cover a relatively large proportion of patients with hypertension. Thus, we conclude that, despite the upgrowing role of combination therapy, there is still ample room for the approach with monotherapy in clinical management of hypertension

Multivariate risk assessment and risk score cards in hypertension

Cardiovascular disease represents the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in Western countries, and hypertension-related cardiovascular events affect about 37 million people per year, worldwide. In this perspective, hypertensive patients are at increased risk to experience cardiovascular events during life-long period, and treatment of high blood pressure represents one of the most effective strategies to reduce global cardiovascular risk. However, due to its multifactorial pathophysiology and its frequent association with other relevant risk factors and clinical conditions, treatment of hypertension requires an integrated approach, including lifestyle measures, antihypertensive drugs and other therapies. Yet, worldwide general practitioners continue to focus their attention on the management of a single risk factor, eg, blood pressure, rather than to global cardiovascular risk profile. In this view, modern strategies of cardiovascular prevention in hypertensive patients should move from a single risk factor based approach toward a more comprehensive risk evaluation in the individual patient. In other words, it is important to define the global cardiovascular risk to manage hypertensive patients at high-risk, rather than to focus on the high level of a single risk factor, for reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population, as well as in hypertensive population

Angiotensin II receptor blockers and myocardial infarction: an updated analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of treatments based on angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on the risk of myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular and all-cause death, as compared with conventional treatment or placebo. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of all available major international, randomized clinical trials (20 trials, n = 108 909 patients, mean age 66.5 +/- 4.1 years), published by 31 August 2008, comparing ARBs with other drugs or conventional therapies (placebo) and reporting MI incidence. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 3.3 +/- 1.1 years, a total of 2374/53 208 and 2354/53 153 cases of MI were recorded in ARB-based groups and in comparator arms, respectively [odds ratio (OR) 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.008 (0.950-1.069)]. Risks of MI were not different when tested in different clinical conditions, including hypertension, high cardiovascular risk, stroke, coronary disease, renal disease and heart failure. No significant differences in the risk of MI between treatment with ARBs versus placebo [OR 95% CI 0.944 (0.841-1.060)], beta-blockers and diuretics [OR 95% CI 0.970 (0.804-1.170)], calcium channel blockers [OR 95% CI 1.112 (0.971-1.272)], or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors [OR 95% CI 1.008 (0.926-1.099)] were observed. Analysis of trials comparing combination therapy based on ARBs plus ACE inhibitors versus active treatments or placebo showed equivalent MI risk [OR 95% CI 0.996 (0.896-1.107)]. CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis indicates that the risk of MI is comparable with use of ARBs and other antihypertensive drugs in a wide range of clinical conditions