Association Between Hematoma Volume and Risk of Subsequent Ischemic Stroke: A MISTIE III and ATACH-2 Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is independently associated with a long-term increased risk of major arterial ischemic events. While the relationship between ICH location and ischemic risk has been studied, whether hematoma volume influences this risk is poorly understood. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from the MISTIE III (Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation Phase 3) and the ATACH-2 (Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage-2) trials. The exposure was hematoma volume, treated as a continuous measure in the primary analysis, and dichotomized by the median in the secondary analyses. The outcome was a symptomatic, clinically overt ischemic stroke, adjudicated centrally within each trial. We evaluated the association between hematoma volume and the risk of an ischemic stroke using Cox regression analyses after adjustment for demographics, vascular comorbidities, and ICH characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1470 patients with ICH, the mean age was 61.7 (SD, 12.8) years, and 574 (38.3%) were female. The median hematoma volume was 17.3 mL (interquartile range, 7.2-35.7). During a median follow-up of 107 days (interquartile range, 91-140), a total of 30 ischemic strokes occurred, of which 22 were in patients with a median ICH volume of ≥17.3 mL and a cumulative incidence of 4.6% (95% CI, 3.1-7.1). Among patients with a median ICH volume <17.3 mL, there were 8 ischemic strokes with a cumulative incidence of 3.1% (95% CI, 1.7-6.0). In primary analyses using adjusted Cox regression models, ICH volume was associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke (hazard ratio, 1.02 per mL increase [95% CI, 1.01-1.04]). In secondary analyses, ICH volume of ≥17.3 mL was associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke (hazard ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.1-7.2]), compared with those with an ICH volume <17.3 mL. CONCLUSIONS: In a heterogeneous cohort of patients with ICH, initial hematoma volume was associated with a heightened short-term risk of ischemic stroke.

Blood Pressure Management for Ischemic Stroke in the First 24 Hours.

High blood pressure (BP) is common after ischemic stroke and associated with a poor functional outcome and increased mortality. The conundrum then arises on whether to lower BP to improve outcome or whether this will worsen cerebral perfusion due to aberrant cerebral autoregulation. A number of large trials of BP lowering have failed to change outcome whether treatment was started prehospital in the community or hospital. Hence, nuances on how to manage high BP are likely, including whether different interventions are needed for different causes, the type and timing of the drug, how quickly BP is lowered, and the collateral effects of the drug, including on cerebral perfusion and platelets. Specific scenarios are also important, including when to lower BP before, during, and after intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapy/thrombectomy, when it may be necessary to raise BP, and when antihypertensive drugs taken before stroke should be restarted. This narrative review addresses these and other questions. Although further large trials are ongoing, it is increasingly likely that there is no simple answer. Different subgroups of patients may need to have their BP lowered (eg, before or after thrombolysis), left alone, or elevated.

Temporal Trajectory of Systolic Blood Pressure and Outcomes in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: ATACH-2 Trial Cohort.

BACKGROUND: To highlight the heterogeneity of acute temporal blood pressure (BP) changes in the ATACH-2 trial (Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage-2) and associations with the outcomes of intracerebral hemorrhage. METHODS: One thousand patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage, who had been randomized to intensive (110-139 mm Hg) or standard (140-179 mm Hg) systolic BP (SBP) lowering with intravenous nicardipine in ATACH-2 from 2011 to 2015, were analyzed about temporal changes in hourly maximum SBP up to 24 hours after randomization using group-based trajectory modeling. Outcomes included death or disability (modified Rankin Scale score 4-6) at 3 months, neurological deterioration within 24 hours (≥2-point decrease in Glasgow Coma Scale score or ≥4-point increase in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score), and acute kidney injury (≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or ≥1.5-fold increase in serum creatinine) within 7 days after onset. RESULTS: Group-based trajectory modeling revealed 4 SBP trajectory groups: moderate SBP (from ≈190 mm Hg at hospital arrival to 150-160 mm Hg after randomization; n=298), moderate-to-low SBP (from ≈190 mm Hg to <140 mm Hg; n=395), high-to-low SBP (from >210 mm Hg to <140 mm Hg; n=134), and high SBP (from >210 mm Hg to 160-170 mm Hg; n=173). Patients with intensive treatment accounted for 11.1%, 88.6%, 85.1%, and 1.7% of each group, respectively. Compared with the moderate-to-low SBP group, the high-to-low SBP group showed increased risks of death or disability at 3 months (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29 [95% CI, 1.24-4.26]) and acute kidney injury (adjusted odds ratio, 3.50 [95% CI, 1.83-6.69]), while no increase in neurological deterioration was seen in this group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.20-1.13]). The moderate SBP and high SBP groups showed no significant risk differences for such outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Data-driven observation using a group-based trajectory modeling approach may be useful to clarify the relationship between antihypertensive treatment, temporal SBP changes, and outcomes in acute intracerebral hemorrhage. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01176565.

In at-risk patients without CVD, polypill plus aspirin reduced a composite of major CV events at 4.6 y.

SOURCE CITATION: Yusuf S, Joseph P, Dans A, et al. Polypill with or without aspirin in persons without cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:216-28. 33186492.

Developing population-based hypertension control programs.

Hypertension remains the leading cause of cardiovascular disease globally despite the availability of safe and effective treatments. Unfortunately, many barriers exist to controlling hypertension, including a lack of effective screening and awareness, an inability to access treatment and challenges with its management when it is treated. Addressing these barriers is complex and requires engaging in a systematic and sustained approach across communities over time. This analysis aims to describe the key elements needed to create an effective delivery system for hypertension control. A successful system requires political will and supportive leadership at all levels of an organization, including at the point of care delivery (office or clinic), in the health care system, and at regional, state and national levels. Effective screening and outreach systems are necessary to identify individuals not previously diagnosed with hypertension, and a system for follow up and tracking is needed after people are diagnosed. Implementing simple protocols for treating hypertension can reduce confusion among providers and increase treatment efficiency. Ensuring easy access to safe, effective and affordable medications can increase blood pressure control and potentially decrease health care system costs. Task-sharing among members of the health care team can expand the services that are delivered. Finally, monitoring of and reporting on the performance of the health care team are needed to learn from those who are doing well, disseminate ideas to those in need of improvement and identify individual patients who need outreach or additional care. Successful large-scale hypertension programs in different settings share many of these key elements and serve as examples to improve systems of hypertension care delivery throughout the world.

A pesar de la disponibilidad de tratamientos seguros y efectivos, la hipertensión sigue siendo la principal causa de enfermedad cardiovascular a nivel mundial. Lamentablemente, el control de la hipertensión enfrenta muchos obstáculos, como la falta de detección y concientización efectivas, la incapacidad de acceder al tratamiento y los retos que plantea su manejo cuando se recibe tratamiento. Resulta complejo abordar estos obstáculos; se debe adoptar un enfoque sistemático y sostenido en todas las comunidades a lo largo del tiempo. El presente análisis tiene como objetivo describir los elementos clave necesarios para crear un sistema de atención eficaz para el control de la hipertensión. Un sistema adecuado precisa voluntad política y un liderazgo que brinde apoyo en todos los niveles de una organización, incluido el punto donde se presta la atención (consultorio o clínica), el sistema de atención de salud y a nivel regional, estatal y nacional. Se necesitan sistemas efectivos de detección y de alcance comunitario para encontrar a las personas sin diagnóstico previo de hipertensión, así como un sistema para el seguimiento y la localización una vez han sido diagnosticadas. La aplicación de protocolos simples para tratar la hipertensión puede reducir la confusión entre los proveedores y aumentar la eficiencia del tratamiento. Garantizar un acceso fácil a medicamentos seguros, efectivos y asequibles puede aumentar el control de la presión arterial y potencialmente disminuir los costos para el sistema de atención de salud. La distribución de tareas entre los miembros del equipo de atención de salud permite expandir los servicios que se prestan. Finalmente, es necesario dar seguimiento al desempeño del equipo de atención de salud y presentar información al respecto, a fin de aprender de las buenas prácticas, difundir ideas entre quienes necesitan mejorar y determinar a cuáles pacientes se debe llegar y cuáles necesitan atención adicional. Los programas de hipertensión a gran escala con buenos resultados en diferentes entornos comparten muchos de estos elementos clave y sirven como ejemplos para mejorar la atención de la hipertensión en todo el mundo.

A hipertensão continua sendo a principal causa de doenças cardiovasculares no mundo, apesar da disponibilidade de tratamentos seguros e eficazes. Infelizmente, existem muitas barreiras para o controle da hipertensão, incluindo a falta de rastreamento e a conscientização eficazes, a incapacidade de acesso ao tratamento e desafios de conduta clínica quando ela é tratada. A abordagem dessas barreiras é complexa e requer um enfoque sistemático e sustentado em diferentes comunidades ao longo do tempo. Esta análise tem como objetivo descrever os elementos-chave necessários para criar um sistema eficaz de prestação de intervenções para o controle da hipertensão. Um sistema de sucesso requer vontade política e liderança que o apoie em todos os níveis de uma organização, inclusive no ponto da prestação de cuidados (consultório ou clínica), no sistema de saúde e nos níveis regional, estadual e nacional. Sistemas eficazes de triagem e acolhida são necessários para identificar indivíduos com hipertensão não diagnosticada, e um sistema de acompanhamento e rastreamento após o diagnóstico se faz igualmente necessário. A implementação de protocolos simples para o tratamento da hipertensão pode reduzir a confusão entre os profissionais de saúde e aumentar a eficiência do tratamento. Garantir o fácil acesso a medicamentos seguros, eficazes e acessíveis pode aumentar o controle da pressão arterial e potencialmente diminuir os custos do sistema de saúde. A divisão de tarefas entre os integrantes da equipe de saúde pode expandir os serviços prestados. Finalmente, é necessário monitorar e informar acerca do desempenho da equipe de saúde para aprender com aqueles que estão indo bem, disseminar ideias para aqueles que precisam melhorar e identificar pacientes individuais que precisam de ajuda ou cuidados adicionais. Programas bem-sucedidos de controle da hipertensão em larga escala em diferentes ambientes compartilham muitos desses elementos-chave e servem como exemplos para melhorar os sistemas de atenção à hipertensão em todo o mundo.

Antihypertensive Drugs for Secondary Prevention After Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Approximately 30% of ischemic strokes occur after a previous stroke or transient ischemic attack. Arterial hypertension is one of the best established risk factors for first and recurrent stroke, both ischemic and hemorrhagic. Guidelines for the secondary prevention of ischemic stroke support the use of blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs in most patients. However, the evidence for these recommendations comes from meta-analyses that included both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients, whereas these 2 conditions differ quantitatively in several aspects. With this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed at summarizing the current evidence on BP-lowering drugs for secondary prevention in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to January 31, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials comparing any specific BP-lowering drug, as monotherapy or combination, with either a control or another BP-lowering drug. RESULTS: Eight studies that enrolled 33 774 patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack were included in the meta-analysis. Mean follow-up was 25 months (range, 3-48). Moderate-quality evidence indicated that a subsequent stroke occurred in 7.9% (ischemic in 7.4% or hemorrhagic in 0.6%) of patients taking any type of BP-lowering drug compared with 9.7% of patients taking placebo (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.66-0.94]; absolute risk difference, -1.9% [95% CI, -3.1% to -0.5%]). Moderate-quality evidence indicated that mortality occurred similarly in patients taking any type of BP-lowering treatment compared with placebo, with an absolute risk of 7.3% and 7.9%, respectively (odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.92-1.10]; absolute risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -0.6% to 0.7%]). CONCLUSIONS: The use of BP-lowering drugs in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack is associated with a 1.9% risk reduction of stroke but does not affect the all-cause mortality risk.

[Features of antihypertensive therapy and real-world prescription of selective imidazoline receptor agonists in Russia vs other countries: STRAIGHT study data analysis].

Analysis of routine clinical practice of hypertensive patient management represents one of the important tools in the search for further ways to minimize hypertension-associated cardiovascular and renal adverse outcomes. AIM: To compare the strategies for hypertension management and features of clinical use of I1-imidazoline receptor (I1-IR) agonists in the Russian Federation and other countries where the STRAIGHT (Selective imidazoline receptor agonists Treatment Recommendation and Action In Global management of HyperTension) study was conducted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: It was a cross-sectional online study involving physicians of various specializations. The study was conducted from January 18 to July 1, 2019, in seven countries with a high rate of I1-IR agonist prescription, including Russia. RESULTS: A total of 125 (4.5%) responders filled out the survey in the Russian Federation, which was somewhat lower than in other countries (6.8%). The participants were mostly general practitioners (54.0%) and cardiologists (42.0%), while in other countries greater diversity was seen. Most Russian physicians (83.0%) seemed to rely on national clinical guidelines in their routine practice, while in other countries the US guidelines were more popular (66.0%). The majority of responders stated that they took into account the traditional risk factors of hypertension when initiating the therapy; every second responder noted if sleep apnea was present. Awareness of I1-IR agonists, their prescription rate and their preference were higher in Russia. The main reported benefits of I1-IR agonists were their efficacy, including in resistant hypertension, and their metabolic effects (in Russia). Most participants preferred I1-IR agonists as third-line therapy (65.0% in Russia vs 60.0% in other countries) and in combination with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) (55.0% in Russia vs 54.0% in other countries). Compared to responders from other countries, Russian physicians prescribe I1-IR agonists as first-line (15.0% vs 5.0%) and second-line (48.0% vs 21.0%) therapy more often. CONCLUSION: Russian physicians were the most aware of I1-IR agonists and tended to prescribe drugs of this class for hypertension management more often, and I1-IR agonist combination with ACEi was preferable compared to physician responders from other countries. Antihypertensive efficacy and metabolic effects were reported as the major benefits of I1-IR agonist therapy.

May Measurement Month 2018: an analysis of blood pressure screening results from Ecuador.

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is a growing burden worldwide, leading to over 10 million deaths each year. May Measurement Month (MMM) is a global initiative by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) aimed at raising awareness of high BP and to act as a temporary solution to the lack of screening programmes worldwide. An opportunistic cross-sectional survey of volunteers aged ≥18 was carried out in May 2018. A volunteer cross-sectional survey was carried out in May 2017 across 33 health centres. Blood pressure measurement, the definition of hypertension (HTN) (mean of the 2nd and 3rd BP measurement ≥ 140/90 mmHg or who were medicated for high BP), and statistical analysis followed the standard MMM protocol. In total, 11 922 individuals (53.7% female) were screened during MMM18. After multiple imputation, 4563 (38.3%) had HTN. Of individuals not receiving antihypertensive medication, 1302 (15.0%) were hypertensive. Of individuals receiving antihypertensive medication, 933 (28.6%) had uncontrolled BP. MMM18 was the largest BP screening campaign done in Ecuador. Hypertension was detected in 38.4% of those screened and almost 4 out of 10 were either not on treatment or were not controlled to the BP goal. These results suggest that appropriate screening can help to identify a significant number of people with high BP. These data should attract the attention of doctors and health care system in Ecuador.

Successful Treatment of Antihypertensive Overdose Using Intravenous Angiotensin II.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple treatment options, antihypertensive overdose remains a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous angiotensin II (AG II) is approved for use in vasodilatory shock. We describe 2 cases of refractory shock from antihypertensive overdose that were successfully treated using AG II. CASE REPORTS: A 24-year-old female presented after an overdose of multiple antihypertensive medications, including an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI). She developed hypotension that was refractory to norepinephrine, epinephrine, and vasopressin, with a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 57 mm Hg 9 h after emergency department arrival. Fifteen minutes after starting AG II at 10 ng/kg/min, her heart rate and MAP rose by 7 beats/min and 12 mm Hg, respectively. Her hemodynamic parameters continued to improve thereafter. She developed acute kidney injury, which resolved prior to discharge. The second patient, a 65-year-old male, presented after an overdose of multiple antihypertensive medications, including an ACEI. Despite norepinephrine, epinephrine, and hyperinsulinemia-euglycemia, he remained bradycardic and hypotensive, with a heart rate of 47 beats/min and MAP of 59 mm Hg. Thirty minutes after starting AG II at 10 ng/kg/min, his heart rate was 61 beats/min and MAP was 66 mm Hg. He recovered without apparent sequelae. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Antihypertensive overdose can lead to shock refractory to catecholamine and vasopressin therapy. Our experience suggests that AG II is efficacious in antihypertensive overdose and may be particularly efficacious in instances of ACEI overdose. However, further study is required to confirm the appropriate indication(s).

[Pharmaceutical intervention to reduce the iatrogenic risk associated with the triple whammy combination]. / Intervención farmacéutica para reducir el riesgo de iatrogenia asociada a la combinación triple whammy.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of an intervention to reduce the iatrogenic risk associated with concomitant treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and/or angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARB) with diuretics and nonsteroidal anti-inflamatory drugs (NSAID), combination known as triple whammy (TW). DESIGN: Uncontrolled before-after intervention study. LOCATION: 15 health centers from a health area (reference population of 292.746 habitants). PARTICIPANTS: 260 patients ≥18 years old with chronic and concomitant prescriptions of drugs from the therapeutic groups (ATC code): diuretics (C03), ACEi/ARBs (C09) and NSAID (M01) during the month of January 2015 INTERVENTIONS: A double intervention was conducted during February and March 2015: an educational part, which consisted of an informative session, and an individualized part, in which recommendations to general practitioner were assessed after reviewing medical records. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The number of patients in whom at least one intervention was accepted and the number of patients who continued on TW combination in June 2015, were analyzed. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the prevalence of TW was compared with the one in June 2015 using the Newcombe-Wilson's hybrid method. RESULTS: 260 patients were included in the study. Recommendations were made in 165 patients (63.5%) and at least one was accepted in 97 (58.8%) patients. In June 2015, 184 patients continued with the TW combination. The TW prevalence decreased by 0.19/1,000 patients (IC 95%: 0.04/1,000 to 0.34/1,000; P=0.017) after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention improved the prescription and reduced the number of patients on TW combination.

[Chronic kidney disease : What is currently available for treatment?] / Chronische Niereninsuffizienz : Was ist gesichert in der Therapie?

Chronic kidney disease is common in the general population with an estimated prevalence of roughly 2 million in Germany. Typically, chronic kidney disease is progressive and in the terminal stage the patients require dialysis or kidney transplantation. In many cases the disease remains silent for a long time but early stages are already associated with increasing morbidity and mortality. Therefore early detection is very important. In recent years several new concepts have been introduced that might help to slow the progression of chronic kidney disease or improve the accompanying risks. Here, we want to provide a nephrologist's perspective on the current guidelines for the treatment and prevention of chronic kidney disease. We summarize which diagnostic approaches are useful for general practitioners and we take a pragmatic look at the existing opportunities for combating renal functional decline. We also shed light on established measures to minimize the risk of comorbidities.

Effects of Blood Pressure and Blood Pressure-Lowering Treatment During the First 24 Hours Among Patients in the Third International Stroke Trial of Thrombolytic Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In patients with acute ischemic stroke, a high blood pressure or a highly variable blood pressure is a common reason for withholding thrombolytic treatment, but guidelines recommend a conservative approach to active blood pressure lowering in this setting. We have performed exploratory analyses to study the clinical effects of blood pressure and early blood pressure-lowering treatment in patients included in a randomized-controlled trial of thrombolytic treatment for acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: The Third International Stroke Trial (IST-3) randomized 3035 patients with ischemic stroke to recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator 0.9 mg/kg or open control within 6 hours of symptom onset. Blood pressure was measured at randomization, at start of treatment, and at 30 minutes and 1 and 24 hours after start of treatment, and the use of blood pressure-lowering treatment during the first 24 hours was recorded. We have characterized blood pressure by mean systolic blood pressure at baseline, by variability of systolic blood pressure (expressed by the standard deviation and the range between the lowest and the highest pressure), and by the change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to 24 hours. We used logistic regression analysis to explore the associations of blood pressure characteristics or blood pressure-lowering treatment with early adverse events, early death, and functional outcome at 6 months, after adjustment for key prognostic variables. RESULTS: High baseline blood pressure and high blood pressure variability during the first 24 hours were associated with higher numbers of early adverse events and early deaths, and for several analyses, the differences were statistically significant. A larger decline in blood pressure and the use of blood pressure-lowering treatment during the first 24 hours were associated with a reduced risk of poor outcome at 6 months (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.97; P=0.001 and odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.93; P=0.007, respectively), irrespective of whether the patient was given recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (P values for interaction >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ischemic stroke who are candidates for thrombolytic treatment, high baseline blood pressure and a large pressure variability during the first 24 hours may be associated with a poor prognosis, whereas a large reduction in blood pressure and the use of blood pressure-lowering treatment during the first 24 hours may be associated with a favorable prognosis. These data support the rationale for further trials of agents that lower blood pressure or reduce blood pressure variability in the acute phase of ischemic stroke. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00120003.

Response of day-to-day home blood pressure variability by antihypertensive drug class after transient ischemic attack or nondisabling stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Visit-to-visit variability in systolic blood pressure (SBP) is associated with an increased risk of stroke and was reduced in randomized trials by calcium channel blockers and diuretics but not by renin-angiotensin system inhibitors. However, time of day effects could not be determined. Day-to-day variability on home BP readings predicts stroke risk and potentially offers a practical method of monitoring response to variability-directed treatment. METHODS: SBP mean, maximum, and variability (coefficient of variation=SD/mean) were determined in 500 consecutive transient ischemic attack or minor stroke patients on 1-month home BP monitoring (3 BPs, 3× daily). Hypertension was treated to a standard protocol. Differences in SBP variability from 3 to 10 days before to 8 to 15 days after starting or increasing calcium channel blockers/diuretics versus renin-angiotensin system inhibitors versus both were compared by general linear models, adjusted for risk factors and baseline BP. RESULTS: Among 288 eligible interventions, variability in SBP was reduced after increased treatment with calcium channel blockers/diuretics versus both versus renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (-4.0 versus 6.9 versus 7.8%; P=0.015), primarily because of effects on maximum SBP (-4.6 versus -1.0 versus -1.0%; P=0.001), with no differences in effect on mean SBP. Class differences were greatest for early-morning SBP variability (3.6 versus 17.0 versus 38.3; P=0.002) and maximum (-4.8 versus -2.0 versus -0.7; P=0.001), with no effect on midmorning (P=0.29), evening (P=0.65), or diurnal variability (P=0.92). CONCLUSIONS: After transient ischemic attack or minor stroke, calcium channel blockers and diuretics reduced variability and maximum home SBP, primarily because of effects on morning readings. Home BP readings enable monitoring of response to SBP variability-directed treatment in patients with recent cerebrovascular events.

Impact of Antihypertensive Medication Changes After Renal Denervation Among Different Patient Groups: SPYRAL HTN-ON MED.

BACKGROUND: The SPYRAL HTN-ON MED (Global Clinical Study of Renal Denervation With the Symplicity Spyral Multi-electrode Renal Denervation System in Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension in the Absence of Antihypertensive Medications)trial showed significant office and nighttime systolic blood pressure (BP) reductions in patients with hypertension following renal denervation (RDN) compared with sham-control patients, despite similar 24-hour BP reductions. We compared antihypertensive medication and BP changes among prespecified subpopulations. METHODS: The multicenter, randomized, sham-controlled, blinded SPYRAL HTN-ON MED trial (n=337) evaluated BP changes after RDN compared with a sham procedure in patients with hypertension prescribed 1 to 3 antihypertensive drugs. Most patients (n=187; 54%) were enrolled outside the United States, while 156 (46%) US patients were enrolled, including 60 (18%) Black Americans. RESULTS: Changes in detected antihypertensive drugs were similar between RDN and sham group patients in the outside US cohort, while drug increases were significantly more common in the US sham group compared with the RDN group. Patients from outside the United States showed significant reductions in office and 24-hour mean systolic BP at 6 months compared with the sham group, whereas BP changes were similar between RDN and sham in the US cohort. Within the US patient cohort, Black Americans in the sham control group had significant increases in medication burden from baseline through 6 months (P=0.003) but not in the RDN group (P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Patients enrolled outside the United States had minimal antihypertensive medication changes between treatment groups and had significant office and 24-hour BP reductions compared with the sham group. Increased antihypertensive drug burden in the US sham cohort, especially among Black Americans, may have diluted the treatment effect in the combined trial population. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02439775.

India Hypertension Control Initiative: Blood Pressure Control Using Drug and Dose-Specific Standard Treatment Protocol at Scale in Punjab and Maharashtra, India, 2022.

Background: Hypertension treatment coverage is low in India. A stepwise simple treatment protocol is one of the strategies to improve hypertension treatment in primary care. We estimated the effectiveness of various protocol steps to achieve blood pressure (BP) control in public sector health facilities in Punjab and Maharashtra, India, where the India Hypertension Control Initiative (IHCI) was implemented. Methods: We analyzed the records of people enrolled for hypertension treatment and follow-up under IHCI between January 2018 and December 2021 in public sector primary and secondary care facilities across 23 districts from two states. Each state followed a different treatment protocol. We calculated the proportion with controlled BP at each step of the protocol. We also estimated the mean decline in BP pre- and post-treatment. Results: Of 281,209 patients initiated on amlodipine 5 mg, 159,292 continued on protocol drugs and came for a follow-up visit during the first quarter of 2022. Of 33,450 individuals who came for the follow-up in Punjab and 125,842 in Maharashtra, 70% and 76% had controlled BP, respectively, at the first step with amlodipine 5 mg. In Punjab, at the second step with amlodipine 10 mg, the cumulative BP control increased to 75%. A similar 5% (76%-81%) increase was seen in the second step after adding telmisartan 40 mg in Maharashtra. Overall, the mean (SD) systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased by 16 mmHg from 148 (15) mmHg at the baseline in Punjab. In Maharashtra, the decline in the mean (SD) SBP was about 15 mmHg from the 144 (18) mmHg baseline. Conclusion: Simple drug- and dose-specific protocols helped achieve a high control rate among patients retained in care under program conditions. We recommend treatment protocols starting with a single low-cost drug and escalating with the same or another antihypertensive drug depending on the cost and availability.

Treatment of hypertension during pregnancy: a cohort of pregnancy episodes from the SIDIAP database, Catalonia, Spain.

Introduction: Hypertension during pregnancy is one of the most frequent causes of maternal and fetal morbimortality. Perinatal and maternal death and disability rates have decreased by 30%, but hypertension during pregnancy has increased by approximately 10% in the last 30 years. This research aimed to describe the pharmacological treatment and pregnancy outcomes of pregnancies with hypertension. Methods: We carried out an observational cohort study from the Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database. Pregnancy episodes with hypertension (ICD-10 codes for hypertension, I10-I15 and O10-O16) were identified. Antihypertensives were classified according to the ATC WHO classification: ß-blocking agents (BBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system (RAS agents), diuretics, and antiadrenergic agents. Exposure was defined for hypertension in pregnancies with ≥2 prescriptions during the pregnancy episode. Descriptive statistics for diagnoses and treatments were calculated. Results: In total, 4,839 pregnancies with hypertension diagnosis formed the study cohort. There were 1,944 (40.2%) pregnancies exposed to an antihypertensive medication. There were differences in mother's age, BMI, and alcohol intake between pregnancies exposed to antihypertensive medications and those not exposed. BBs were the most used (n = 1,160 pregnancy episodes; 59.7%), followed by RAS agents (n = 825, 42.4%), and CCBs were the least used (n = 347, 17.8%). Discussion: Pregnancies involving hypertension were exposed to antihypertensive medications, mostly BBs. We conduct a study focused on RAS agent use during pregnancy and its outcomes in the offspring.

Adherence to Antihypertensive Therapy and Its Determinants: A Systematic Review.

Hypertension is a globally prevalent condition, and low adherence to antihypertensive therapy is considered one of the main causes of poor blood pressure (BP) control. Non-adherence to antihypertensive treatment is a complex issue that can arise from various factors; however, gaining an understanding of this provides key targets for intervention strategies. This study aimed to provide an overview of the current status and recent developments regarding our understanding of the determinants of patients' adherence to antihypertensives. A systematic review was performed using the electronic databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), and "Índex das Revistas Médicas Portuguesas", which included studies published between 2017 and 2021 following the PICOS model: (P) Adult patients with the diagnosis of primary hypertension, using at least one antihypertensive agent; (I) all interventions on both pharmacological and non-pharmacological level; (C) patient's adherence against their non-adherence; (O) changes in adherence to the therapeutic plan; and (S) any study design (except review articles) written in English, French, Spanish or Portuguese. Articles were reviewed by two researchers and their quality was assessed. Subsequently, determinants were classified according to their consistent or inconsistent association with adherence or non-adherence. Only 45 of the 635 reports identified met the inclusion criteria. Adherence was consistently associated with patient satisfaction with communication, patient-provider relationship, their treatment, and use of eHealth and mHealth strategies; a patient's mental and physical health, including depression, cognitive impairment, frailty, and disability, previous hospitalization, occurrence of vital events; drug treatment type and appearance; and unwillingness due to health literacy, self-efficacy, and both implicit and explicit attitudes towards treatment. There were discrepancies regarding the association of other factors to adherence, but these inconsistent factors should also be taken into account. In conclusion, the barriers to adherence are varied and often interconnected between socioeconomic, patient, therapy, condition, and healthcare system levels. Healthcare teams should invest in studying patients' non-adherence motives and tailoring interventions to individual levels, by using a multifaceted approach to assess adherence. Further research is needed to analyze the impact of implicit attitudes, the use of new technological approaches, and the influence of factors that are inconsistently associated with non-adherence, to understand their potential in implementing adherence strategies.