Hypertension in children and adolescents.

Definition and management of arterial hypertension in children and adolescents are uncertain, due to different positions of current guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology task-force, constituted by Associations and Councils with interest in arterial hypertension, has reviewed current literature and evidence, to produce a Consensus Document focused on aspects of hypertension in the age range of 6-16 years, including definition, methods of measurement of blood pressure, clinical evaluation, assessment of hypertension-mediated target organ damage, evaluation of possible vascular, renal and hormonal causes, assessment and management of concomitant risk factors with specific attention for obesity, and anti-hypertensive strategies, especially focused on life-style modifications. The Consensus Panel also suggests aspects that should be studied with high priority, including generation of multi-ethnic sex, age and height specific European normative tables, implementation of randomized clinical trials on different diagnostic and therapeutic aspects, and long-term cohort studies to link with adult cardiovascular risk. Finally, suggestions for the successful implementation of the contents of the present Consensus document are also given.

Sex differences in arterial hypertension.

There is strong evidence that sex chromosomes and sex hormones influence blood pressure (BP) regulation, distribution of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and co-morbidities differentially in females and males with essential arterial hypertension. The risk for CV disease increases at a lower BP level in females than in males, suggesting that sex-specific thresholds for diagnosis of hypertension may be reasonable. However, due to paucity of data, in particularly from specifically designed clinical trials, it is not yet known whether hypertension should be differently managed in females and males, including treatment goals and choice and dosages of antihypertensive drugs. Accordingly, this consensus document was conceived to provide a comprehensive overview of current knowledge on sex differences in essential hypertension including BP development over the life course, development of hypertension, pathophysiologic mechanisms regulating BP, interaction of BP with CV risk factors and co-morbidities, hypertension-mediated organ damage in the heart and the arteries, impact on incident CV disease, and differences in the effect of antihypertensive treatment. The consensus document also highlights areas where focused research is needed to advance sex-specific prevention and management of hypertension.

Translating the 2021 ESC heart failure guideline recommendations in daily practice: Results from a heart failure survey. A scientific statement of the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice and the Heart Failure Association of the ESC.

AIMS: Real-world data show that guidelines are insufficiently implemented, and particularly guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) are underused in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in clinical practice. The Council for Cardiology Practice and the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed a survey aiming to (i) evaluate the perspectives of the cardiology community on the 2021 ESC heart failure (HF) guidelines, (ii) pinpoint disparities in disease management, and (iii) propose strategies to enhance adherence to HF guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 22-question survey regarding the diagnosis and treatment of HFrEF was delivered between March and June 2022. Of 457 physicians, 54% were general cardiologists, 19.4% were HF specialists, 18.9% other cardiac specialists, and 7.7% non-cardiac specialists. For diagnosis, 52.1% employed echocardiography and natriuretic peptides (NPs), 33.2% primarily used echocardiography, and 14.7% predominantly relied on NPs. The first drug class initiated in HFrEF was angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ACEi/ARNi) (91.2%), beta-blockers (BB) (73.8%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) (53.4%), and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors (48.1%). The combination ACEi/ARNi + MRA+ BB was preferred by 39.3% of physicians, ACEi/ARNi + SGLT2 inhibitors + BB by 33.3%, and ACEi/ARNi + BB by 22.2%. The time required to initiate and optimize GDMT was estimated to be <1 month by 8.3%, 1-3 months by 52%, 3-6 months by 31.8%, and >6 months by 7.9%. Compared to general cardiologists, HF specialists/academic cardiologists reported lower estimated time-to-initiation, and more commonly preferred a parallel initiation of GDMT rather than a sequential approach. CONCLUSION: Participants generally followed diagnostic and treatment guidelines, but variations in HFrEF management across care settings or HF specialties were noted. The survey may raise awareness and promote standardized HF care.

Physician perceptions, attitudes, and strategies towards implementing guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A survey of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC and the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice.

AIMS: Recent guidelines recommend four core drug classes (renin-angiotensin system inhibitor/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [RASi/ARNi], beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist [MRA], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor [SGLT2i]) for the pharmacological management of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We assessed physicians' perceived (i) comfort with implementing the recent HFrEF guideline recommendations; (ii) status of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) implementation; (iii) use of different GDMT sequencing strategies; and (iv) barriers and strategies for achieving implementation. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 26-question survey was disseminated via bulletin, e-mail and social channels directed to physicians with an interest in HF. Of 432 respondents representing 91 countries, 36% were female, 52% were aged <50 years, and 90% mainly practiced in cardiology (30% HF). Overall comfort with implementing quadruple therapy was high (87%). Only 12% estimated that >90% of patients with HFrEF without contraindications received quadruple therapy. The time required to initiate quadruple therapy was estimated at 1-2 weeks by 34% of respondents, 1 month by 36%, 3 months by 24%, and ≥6 months by 6%. The average respondent favoured traditional drug sequencing strategies (RASi/ARNi with/followed by beta-blocker, and then MRA with/followed by SGLT2i) over simultaneous initiation or SGLT2i-first sequences. The most frequently perceived clinical barriers to implementation were hypotension (70%), creatinine increase (47%), hyperkalaemia (45%) and patient adherence (42%). CONCLUSIONS: Although comfort with implementing all four core drug classes in patients with HFrEF was high among physicians, a majority estimated implementation of GDMT in HFrEF to be low. We identified several important perceived clinical and non-clinical barriers that can be targeted to improve implementation.

Management of Hypertension in the Elderly and Frail Patient.

Hypertension is a frequent finding in elderly patients. Hypertension in older age can be both associated with frailty and represent a risk factor for frailty. Hypertension is recognized as a main risk factor for cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and stroke and the occurrence of these diseases may provoke a decline in health status and/or worsen the degree of frailty. Blood pressure targets in hypertensive older and frail patients are not completely defined. However, specific evaluations of individual patients and their co-morbidities and assessment of domains and components of frailty, together with weighted consideration of drug use, may help in finding the appropriate therapy.

Digital health in older adults for the prevention and management of cardiovascular diseases and frailty. A clinical consensus statement from the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice/Taskforce on Geriatric Cardiology, the ESC Digital Health Committee and the ESC Working Group on e-Cardiology.

Digital health technology is receiving increasing attention in cardiology. The rise of accessibility of digital health tools including wearable technologies and smart phone applications used in medical practice has created a new era in healthcare. The coronavirus pandemic has provided a new impetus for changes in delivering medical assistance across the world. This Consensus document discusses the potential implementation of digital health technology in older adults, suggesting a practical approach to general cardiologists working in an ambulatory outpatient clinic, highlighting the potential benefit and challenges of digital health in older patients with, or at risk of, cardiovascular disease. Advancing age may lead to a progressive loss of independence, to frailty, and to increasing degrees of disability. In geriatric cardiology, digital health technology may serve as an additional tool both in cardiovascular prevention and treatment that may help by (i) supporting self-caring patients with cardiovascular disease to maintain their independence and improve the management of their cardiovascular disease and (ii) improving the prevention, detection, and management of frailty and supporting collaboration with caregivers. Digital health technology has the potential to be useful for every field of cardiology, but notably in an office-based setting with frequent contact with ambulatory older adults who may be pre-frail or frail but who are still able to live at home. Cardiologists and other healthcare professionals should increase their digital health skills and learn how best to apply and integrate new technologies into daily practice and how to engage older people and their caregivers in a tailored programme of care.

Survey on e-health knowledge and usage in general cardiology of the Council of Cardiology Practice and the Digital Health Committee.

The Council for Cardiology Practice of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the Digital Health Committee (DHC), undertook an electronic survey with 15 question multiple-choice questionnaire sent to 32 461 members of the ESC with the aim to assess the knowledge and usage of digital health (DH) technologies (DHTs) by office-based cardiologists. Of 559 respondents, 57% graded their knowledge about DH as 'fair' and three quarters identified the correct definition of DH. Clinical information systems, mHealth Apps, and telemedicine were the most frequently used DHTs, but 41% of respondents had concerns about their ethical and data transparency. Lack of legal clarity, low patient motivation, limited DH literacy, and poor access to DH were perceived as the main barriers to the adoption of DH. Seventy percent of the respondents were aware of the DH pages on the ESC website and 76% of the educational sessions in the DH area during the ESC Congress 2019. Only 16% had not read articles on DH. Eight-eight percent of responders declared that they would 'probably' or definitely attend future educational initiatives on DHT.

Survey on arterial hypertension management: a report from the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice and the ESC Council on Hypertension.

Aims: To explore the management of hypertensive patients by general cardiologists a few months after the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)-European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Guidelines publication. Methods and results: A survey based on a 26-point questionnaire was sent to ∼69 000 worldwide ESC members, a few months after the ESC-ESH Guidelines publication. A total of 1458 responses were collected via a web-based form. Among them, 68% were men, 48% were below 45 years old, and 60% were from Europe. Current guidelines have been read, at least partially, by 92.8%. Measurement of blood pressure (BP) is mostly done using the auscultatory method (58.8%) while unattended BP is rarely performed. Different bladder cuffs are not available for different arm circumferences for 27% of responders. Routine workup in hypertensive patients includes more often 12 leads ECG (97.7%) and echocardiography (79.6%). Only 30.9% of responders systematically assess the cardiovascular risk by the SCORE system and orthostatic hypotension is systematically researched by only 39.1%. Respondents consider that BP target of 140/90 mmHg is achievable in 60-80% of patients and 130/80 mmHg in 40-60%. Guidelines are considered too tight to be achievable by 15.6%, while 77.4% consider they are exactly right. Low patient's compliance, awareness of hypertension (HT) risk, and, at a lower degree, physician inertia, represent the main treatment challenges in reaching BP goals to most respondents, while treatment effectiveness is not in question. The present survey demonstrates specific gaps in HT management that need attention in clinical practice.

Late phase of COVID-19 pandemic in General Cardiology. A position paper of the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice.

Cardiovascular (CV) engagement in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a huge determinant of prognosis during the acute phase of the disease. However, little is known about the potential chronic implications of the late phase of COVID-19 and about the appropriate approach to these patients. Heart failure, type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, myocarditis, pulmonary fibrosis, and thrombosis have been shown to be related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, and a 'long COVID-19' illness has been recognized with fatigue, chest pain, and dyspnoea among the most frequent symptoms reported after discharge from hospital. This paper focuses on some open questions that cardiologists are going to face during the next months in a general cardiology outpatient clinic, in particular how to evaluate a 'post-COVID' patient during follow-up of CV complications of the acute phase and how to manage new CV symptoms that could be the consequence, at least in part, of heart/vessels and/or lung involvement of the previous virus infection. Present symptoms and signs, history of previous CV disease (both preceding COVID-19 and occurring during viral infection), and specific laboratory and imaging measurements during the acute phase may be of interest in focusing on how to approach the clinical evaluation of a post-COVID patient and how to integrate in our standard of care the new information on COVID-19, possibly in a multidisciplinary view. Dealing with the increased COVID-associated CV risk burden and becoming acquainted with potential new e-cardiology approaches aimed at integrating the cardiology practice are relevant new challenges brought by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and its sequelae.

Heart failure and its complications in patients with diabetes: Mounting evidence for a growing burden.

Heart failure (HF) is one of the major challenges in the management of diabetes patients. Among subjects with diabetes, up to 20% could have HF. Conversely, diabetes prevalence in HF patients varies greatly from more than 10% up to 50%. When it is present, the risk of mortality and rehospitalization increases substantially. In addition, current evidence points to an increased risk of atrial fibrillation and sudden cardiac death in patients with diabetes. The inter-relation between diabetes cardiomyopathy, left ventricular hypertrophy, coronary artery disease and renal dysfunction indicates complex and intricate pathways. Despite the great value of clinical assessment and echocardiography, there is insufficient data to suggest systematic screening for HF in asymptomatic patients with diabetes. There is little evidence to indicate that improved glycaemic control improves HF outcome in this population. In the case of established HF, the general guidelines apply in diabetes patients. However, recent advances concerning glucose-lowering treatment in patients with cardiovascular disease suggest that the choice of glucose-lowering agent is of crucial interest and should be based on the patient's phenotype. New drug classes, such as SGLT2 inhibitors, seem to be of particular benefit in these patients. In the future, new personalized strategies should aim at not only good control of the glycaemic level but also the reduction and possibly the prevention of HF onset.

Glucose-lowering therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for developing cardiovascular disease, and many patients with diabetes have prevalent cardiovascular complications. Recent cardiovascular outcome clinical trials suggest that certain new glucose-lowering drugs are accompanied by additional cardioprotective properties. Indeed, selected glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists have a proved cardiovascular benefit in terms of a reduced incidence of ischaemic events, while sodium/glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors have also shown significant protection, with a striking effect on heart failure and renal endpoints. These findings have been integrated in recent guidelines which now recommend prescribing (when initial metformin monotherapy fails) a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist or a sodium/glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor with clinical trial-confirmed benefit in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and a sodium/glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor in such patients with heart failure or chronic kidney disease at initial stages. Furthermore, the new 2019 European Society of Cardiology guidelines in collaboration with the European Association for the Study of Diabetes recommend a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist or a sodium/glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor in treatment-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or at high cardiovascular risk. Future research will disentangle the mechanisms underpinning these beneficial effects and will also establish to what extent these results are generalisable to the whole diabetes population. In the meantime, available evidence should prompt a wide diffusion of these two classes of drugs among patients with diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Here, we briefly summarise recent findings emerging from cardiovascular outcome clinical trials, discuss their impact on treatment algorithms and propose new possible approaches to improve our knowledge further regarding the cardiovascular effect of glucose-lowering medications.

Diabetes as a cardiovascular risk factor: An overview of global trends of macro and micro vascular complications.

The global prevalence of diabetes is predicted to increase dramatically in the coming decades as the population grows and ages, in parallel with the rising burden of overweight and obesity, in both developed and developing countries. Cardiovascular disease represents the principal cause of death and morbidity among people with diabetes, especially in those with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Adults with diabetes have 2-4 times increased cardiovascular risk compared with adults without diabetes, and the risk rises with worsening glycaemic control. Diabetes has been associated with 75% increase in mortality rate in adults, and cardiovascular disease accounts for a large part of the excess mortality. Diabetes-related macrovascular and microvascular complications, including coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, chronic renal disease, diabetic retinopathy and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy are responsible for the impaired quality of life, disability and premature death associated with diabetes. Given the substantial clinical impact of diabetes as a cardiovascular risk factor, there has been a growing focus on diabetes-related complications. While some population-based studies suggest that the epidemiology of such complications is changing and that rates of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among individuals with diabetes are decreasing in high-income countries, the economic and social burden of diabetes is expected to rise due to changing demographics and lifestyle especially in middle- and low-income countries. In this review we outline data from population-based studies on recent and long-term trends in diabetes-related complications.

Ambulatory hypertensive patients treated by cardiologists in France.

BACKGROUND: While general practitioners treat most hypertensive patients in France, hypertension is the most frequent pathology treated by cardiologists, raising questions about the differing profiles of such patients. Poor control of hypertension is commonly reported, and yet has not improved over time. Better understanding of the determinants of control, at both patient and physician levels, is necessary to implement improvements in practice. AIMS: To describe the hypertensive population treated by independent cardiologists in France and to assess the prevalence and determinants of not-at-goal blood pressure (BP), at patient and physician levels. METHODS: The COLHYGE study was an observational cross-sectional epidemiological study. Consecutive patients (n=5798) were selected by 371 independent cardiologists in France. Data concerning patients and physicians were assessed. RESULTS: Our study population had an elevated cardiovascular risk, high prevalence of patients in secondary cardiovascular prevention (27.5%) and a high proportion of diabetic patients (22.8%). Only 20.8% of the population presented controlled BP. At the patient level, the following variables were negatively and independently associated with BP control: age; body mass index; heart rate; recently diagnosed hypertension; left ventricular hypertrophy; patient belief that they are taking too many pills; prescription of calcium channel blockers, lipid-lowering agents and antiplatelet agents. Presence of atrial fibrillation and the prescription of renin-angiotensin system blockers and fixed combinations correlated positively with BP control. At the physician level, working in big cities and having an exclusive independent practice were associated with good BP control. There was high heterogeneity among physicians in terms of BP control, independent of the patient and physician characteristics assessed. CONCLUSION: The COLHYGE study has confirmed a high cardiovascular risk and poor BP control among hypertensive patients treated by cardiologists in France. Strategies aiming to control BP should focus on both patient and physician characteristics.

Gender-related differences in the management of hypertension by cardiologists: the PARITE study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown gender differences in the management of cardiovascular risk factors and diseases. Whether the management of hypertension by cardiologists in France differs according to patient gender has not been fully investigated. AIMS: The main objective of this cross-sectional, multicentre study was to examine the management according to gender of hypertensive patients by office-based cardiologists in France. METHODS: Cardiologists were asked to include consecutively two men and two women attending a routine consultation for essential hypertension. Therapeutic management was evaluated by comparing cardiovascular investigations in the preceding 6 months and hypertension control according to gender and the patients' global cardiovascular risk. RESULTS: Overall, data from 3440 adult patients (53% men) referred to 654 cardiologists were analysed. Hypertension was uncontrolled in 76% of both men and women and 69% were at high global cardiovascular risk (75% of men, 62% of women; P<0.001). Significantly fewer cardiovascular investigations had been performed in the preceding 6 months in women (22.6% vs 44.2% in men; P<0.001). The treatment regimen was changed by the cardiologist in approximately 50% of patients regardless of gender or global cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: The PARITE study shows that in French office-based cardiology practice, the antihypertensive regimen is adjusted as often in female as in male patients. However, the results suggest that there is room for improvement in the investigation of cardiovascular disease in women. Healthcare providers could be encouraged to implement established guidelines on the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women.

Screening abdominal aorta aneurysm during echocardiography: literature review and proposal for a French nationwide study.

Several international guidelines, including those in France, recommend the screening of abdominal aorta aneurysm (AAA) by ultrasound in high-risk populations. However, this preventive screening strategy is poorly implemented. Many patients who undergo transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) are at risk of AAA as defined by the guidelines, and the cardiac ultrasound machines and probes fit perfectly for AAA screening. In this literature review, we collected data from more than 20,000 patients who underwent screening for AAA during TTE, from 10 single-centre series. While the studies differed regarding patient selection and AAA definition, the feasibility of AAA screening during TTE was excellent (mostly >90%), with the need for an average of 2-7 minutes to be added to the cardiac imaging time. The prevalence of AAA >30 mm ranged from 0.8% to 6.5%, and up to 19% in men aged >70 years. The risk factors for the presence of AAA among attendees of echocardiography laboratories were similar to those reported in the general population: age, male gender, smoking, hypertension, family history of AAA and prevalent atherosclerotic diseases. Some echocardiography-specific factors, such as left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation and poor left ventricular ejection fraction were also reported. To better assess the benefit of and indications for AAA screening during TTE in clinical practice, we propose a multicentre, nationwide, screening study in echocardiography laboratories in our country.