Middle-Aged and Older Patients With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy: Higher Mortality With Drug Treated Systolic Blood Pressure Below 130 mm Hg.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% of people with hypertension have left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) detected by ECG or echocardiography. Because patients with LVH have poor myocardial microcirculation, they may be too sensitive to lowering systolic blood pressure (SBP) too much due to a lack of myocardial perfusion pressure. We aimed to investigate whether the average achieved SBP <130 mm Hg may cause harm in patients with LVH in the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-Term Use Evaluation trial (VALUE). METHODS: Of the 15 245 VALUE participants, we identified 13 803 patients without cardiovascular events during the first 6 months after randomization. Of these, 2458 patients had electrocardiographic LVH (ECG-LVH). Cox analyses adjusted for age, gender, and baseline variables compared cardiac and all-cause mortality and other prespecified end points for patients who achieved average SBP 130 to 139 mm Hg (No-LVH group n=4863; ECG-LVH group n=929) and <130 mm Hg (No-LVH group n=2107; ECG-LVH group n=305). Reference groups were patients who achieved average SBP ≥140 mm Hg following the first excluded 6 months (No-LVH group n=4375; ECG-LVH group n=1224). RESULTS: The No-LVH group achieving average SBP <130 mm Hg had a significantly lower incidence of several cardiovascular end points. The ECG-LVH group achieving average SBP <130 mm Hg had higher cardiac mortality (hazard ratio, 1.98 [95% CIs, 1.06-3.70]; P=0.032) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.74 [95% CIs, 1.17-2.60]; P=0.007), and SBP <130 mm Hg was not associated with a reduction in any end point. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings may be seen as a signal that caution is warranted when treating middle-aged and older patients with electrocardiographic or echocardiographic LVH to SBP <130 mm Hg.

Aortic Root Dilatation in Hypertensive Patients with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy-Application of A New Multivariate Predictive Model. The Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Available nomograms to predict aortic root (AoR) diameter for body surface area have limitations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a new multivariate predictive model to identify AoR dilatation in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. METHODS: 943 of 961 patients in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) echocardiographic sub-study had the necessary baseline characteristics and echocardiographic 2D measurements of AoR size to be included. RESULTS: Predicted AoR (Sinus of Valsalva) diameter was 1.519 + (age [years] × 0.010) + (height [cm] × 0.010) - (gender [1 = M, 2 = F] × 0.247), and a measured AoR diameter exceeding the 97.5-percentile of this estimate was considered dilated. Measured AoR diameter was larger in men than in women (3.75 vs. 3.48 cm, p < 0.001) and AoR diameter predicted by the model was larger than predicted by nomogram (3.52 vs. 3.28 cm, p < 0.001). Using the multivariate model to identify patients with AoR dilatation, the prevalence was 13.7% in men and 12.3% in women (p = 0.537). There was consensus of AoR phenotype (normal/dilated) between model and nomogram in 92.8% of the patients. In multivariate logistic regression, AoR dilatation by model definition was predicted by presence of aortic regurgitation (OR 2.67, p < 0.001) and SD increase in age (OR 0.75, p = 0.023), pulse pressure (OR 0.64, p < 0.001), left ventricular mass index (OR 1.36, p = 0.08) and stroke volume (OR 1.45, p = 0.002), but not by body weight. CONCLUSIONS: Using the proposed model the prevalence of AoR dilatation was equal in men and women and the model seems to address the effects of gender, age and body size on AoR size. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT00338260.

Renal sympathetic denervation lowers systemic vascular resistance in true treatment-resistant hypertension.

PURPOSE: Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) is again gaining interest as recent well-designed trials have demonstrated reduced ambulatory blood pressure (BP) after RDN. However, the hemodynamic mechanisms have not been elucidated. We aimed for the first time to investigate the effect of RDN on the "Hallmark of Hypertension" namely increased systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated SVRI change in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension randomised to RDN (n = 9) or drug adjusted control (n = 9). Treatment-resistant hypertension was defined as office systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg despite ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. True treatment-resistant hypertension was confirmed prior to inclusion with ambulatory daytime systolic BP ≥ 135 mmHg immediately after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs. Hemodynamic variables were recorded with thoracic impedance cardiography at baseline and at three and six months follow-up after RDN. This non-invasive method also guided further tailoring of drug treatment in the control group aiming to normalise hemodynamic variables and BP. RESULTS: From three to six months follow-up after RDN, SVRI decreased with a median of -611 dyn*s*m2/cm5 [IQR -949 to -267] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with a median of -11 mmHg [IQR -21 to -3] (p = 0.02). In the same period, SVRI in the control group was reduced with -674 dyn*s*m2/cm5 [IQR -1,309 to -340] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with -15 mmHg [IQR -29 to -6] (p = 0.01). Thus, hemodynamic variables and BP in the two groups normalised in parallel. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic denervation lowers BP by reducing systemic vascular resistance of similar size as in the control group with careful individual selection of antihypertensive drugs and dose titration.

Antihypertensive therapy prevents new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with isolated systolic hypertension: the LIFE study.

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk and the incidence increases with age, hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Reducing in-treatment systolic blood pressure (SBP) prevents new-onset AF but has previously not been studied in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). We aimed to investigate the effect on preventing new-onset AF by decreased in-treatment SBP in patients with ISH compared to patients with non-ISH. Methods and results: Double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of 1320 patients with ISH and electrocardiographic (ECG) LVH, included among the 9193 patients in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. Annual ECGs were Minnesota coded centrally, and new-onset AF was evaluated in 1248 ISH patients and compared with 7583 non-ISH patients during mean 4.8 ± 0.9 years follow-up. Cox regression analyses were used to assess the effect of reduced in-treatment SBP. New-onset AF occurred in 61 (4.9%) ISH patients and 292 (3.9%) non-ISH patients. In multivariate analysis lower in-treatment SBP was associated with 17% risk reduction (p = 0.008) for new-onset AF in ISH patients and 9% risk reduction (p = 0.006) in non-ISH patients per 10 mmHg decrease in in-treatment SBP, independent of treatment modality, baseline risk factors, baseline SBP and in-treatment heart rate and ECG-LVH. There was a significant interaction (p = 0.041) in favor of SBP reduction and AF prevention in ISH vs. non-ISH patients. Conclusion: Our data suggest that the effect of in-treatment SBP reduction in preventing new-onset AF is stronger in ISH compared to non-ISH patients with hypertension and ECG-LVH. However, the principal findings were the same in ISH and non-ISH patients.

Sham or no sham control: that is the question in trials of renal denervation for resistant hypertension. A systematic meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies of renal denervation (RDN) in patients with apparent treatment resistant hypertension have been hampered by a number of patient and physician related confounders on blood pressure (BP) including poor drug adherence. It remains uncertain whether RDN lowers BP. We aimed to investigate whether the use of sham control is essential in RDN studies or whether systematic use of 24-hour ambulatory BP provides enough information thereby making an invasive sham control redundant. METHODS: We meta-analyzed randomized controlled trials of the BP response to RDN on top of continued or optimized antihypertensive drugs in patients with resistant hypertension. On top of the randomized trials reviewed earlier, we additionally included three studies, one conducted in Spain (24 patients, RDN vs. spironolactone), one conducted in Denmark (69 patients, sham controlled) and one conducted in Netherlands (139 patients, RDN vs. continued treatment). We analyzed 24-hour ambulatory BP in 3 sham controlled studies vs. 7 no sham controlled studies. RESULTS: The updated meta-analysis of 10 studies showed 3.6 mmHg (p = .45) and 1.0 mmHg (p = .54) reductions in office and in 24-hour systolic BP, respectively. Meta-analysis of 24-hour systolic BP in the 3 sham-controlled studies showed a reduction of 2.18 mmHg (95% confidence intervals (CIs) -4.70 to 0.33 mmHg, n = 396 vs. 230, p = .07). For the 7 no sham controlled studies there was no difference in 24-hour systolic BP (+0.38 mmHg; 95% CIs -5.29 to 6.04 mmHg, n = 215 vs. 245, p = .90). The test for sub-group heterogeneity showed no significant interaction (p = .69). Removing one trial at a time produced confirmatory results. CONCLUSION: The overall meta-analysis of 10 randomized and controlled studies showed no significant effect on BP of RDN in resistant hypertension. Moreover, our analysis does not support the use of sham control but rather suggests extensive use of 24-hour ambulatory BP in studies of RDN in resistant hypertension.

A randomized and controlled study of noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring as a guide to drug treatment of uncontrolled hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: In the BEtter control of BP in hypertensive pAtients monitored Using the HOTMAN sYstem study, we investigated whether utilizing noninvasive monitoring of hemodynamic parameters combined with a drug selection algorithm (integrated hemodynamic management - IHM) compared with conventional drug selection may improve uncontrolled hypertension in European Hypertension Excellence centers. METHOD: Uncontrolled (office SBP >140 mmHg and ambulatory daytime SBP >135 mmHg while taking ≥2 antihypertensive drugs) essential hypertensive patients were referred to five European Hypertension Excellence centers and, if eligible, were randomized to IHM-guided (n = 83) vs. conventional (control, n = 84) treatment adjustment in an investigator-initiated multicenter prospective randomized parallel groups controlled study. RESULTS: The average number of antihypertensive drugs increased from 3.1 to 4.1 in both groups and differed only in a rise of the use of diuretics in the IHM groups (from 13 to 31%). Daytime SBP, defined as the primary endpoint, decreased markedly and to the same extent from baseline to 6 months in IHM (-15.8 ±â€Š14.8 mmHg) and control (-15.4 ±â€Š14.5 mmHg) groups (P = 0.87), with a similar behavior of office SBP (no between group differences, P = 0.18). Average number of adverse events was significantly lower in IHM than in controls (P = 0.008) but of the more general type and not necessarily related to drug treatment. CONCLUSION: Thus, noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring associated with a drug selection algorithm induced similar reductions in ambulatory daytime and office SBP compared with conventional drug selection in uncontrolled hypertensive patients referred to European Hypertension Excellence centers.Clinical Trial Registration - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01482364.

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of renal denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: The blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of renal sympathetic nervous denervation (RDN) in resistant hypertension (rHT) shows large variation among studies. METHODS: We meta-analyzed summary statistics of randomized clinical trials on RDN in rHT. For continuous outcomes, we assessed heterogeneity by Cochran's Q test and used random-effect models weighted for the inverse of the variance. We assessed safety by assessing the risk of major adverse events from stratified contingency tables. RESULTS: Of 5652 patients screened in seven trials, 985 (17.4%) qualified and were randomized to control (n = 397) or RDN with SYMPLICITY(™) catheters (n = 588). Follow-up was 6 months. In both control and RDN patients, antihypertensive treatment was continued or optimized. At enrolment, age averaged 58.1 years, systolic/diastolic office and 24 h BP 168.5/93.3 mmHg and 151.8/86.1 mmHg, respectively, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 79.3 ml/min/1.73 m². For BP outcomes, there was heterogeneity among trials. Pooled effects (control minus RDN) were -4.9/-3.5 mmHg (95% confidence interval, -20.9 to 11.1/-8.9 to 1.9) for office BP, -2.8/-1.5 mmHg (-6.5 to 0.8/-3.3 to 0.4) for 24 h BP and 0.81 ml/min/1.73 m² (-1.69 to 3.30) for eGFR. Removing one trial at a time produced confirmatory results. Adverse events occurred in 7.4% and 9.9% of control and RDN patients, respectively (p = 0.24). CONCLUSION: In selected rHT patients maintained on antihypertensive drugs, RDN with the SYMPLICITY systems does not significantly decrease BP but is safe. Future trials with next-generation catheters should aim at identifying responders in patients with evidence of sympathetic nervous overactivity.

Renal sympathetic denervation after Symplicity HTN-3 and therapeutic drug monitoring in severe hypertension.

Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) has been and is still proposed as a new treatment modality in patients with apparently treatment resistant hypertension (TRH), a condition defined as persistent blood pressure elevation despite prescription of at least 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. However, the large fall in blood pressure after RDN reported in the first randomized study, Symplicity HTN-2 and multiple observational studies has not been confirmed in five subsequent prospective randomized studies and may be largely explained by non-specific effects such as improvement of drug adherence in initially poorly adherent patients (the Hawthorne effect), placebo effect and regression to the mean. The overall blood-pressure lowering effect of RDN seems rather limited and the characteristics of true responders are largely unknown. Accordingly, RDN is not ready for clinical practice. In most patients with apparently TRH, drug monitoring and improvement of drug adherence may prove more effective and cost-beneficial to achieve blood pressure control. In the meantime, research should aim at identifying characteristics of those patients with truly TRH who may respond to RDN.

Adjusted drug treatment is superior to renal sympathetic denervation in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension.

We aimed to investigate for the first time the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) versus clinically adjusted drug treatment in true treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) after excluding patients with confounding poor drug adherence. Patients with apparent TRH (n=65) were referred for RDN, and those with secondary and spurious hypertension (n=26) were excluded. TRH was defined as office systolic BP (SBP) >140 mm Hg, despite maximally tolerated doses of ≥3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. In addition, ambulatory daytime SBP >135 mm Hg after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs was required, after which 20 patients had normalized BP and were excluded. Patients with true TRH were randomized and underwent RDN (n=9) performed with Symplicity Catheter System versus clinically adjusted drug treatment (n=10). The study was stopped early for ethical reasons because RDN had uncertain BP-lowering effect. Office SBP and diastolic BP in the drug-adjusted group changed from 160±14/88±13 mm Hg (±SD) at baseline to 132±10/77±8 mm Hg at 6 months (P<0.0005 and P=0.02, SBP and diastolic BP, respectively) and in the RDN group from 156±13/91±15 to 148±7/89±8 mm Hg (P=0.42 and P=0.48, SBP and diastolic BP, respectively). SBP and diastolic BP were significantly lower in the drug-adjusted group at 6 months (P=0.002 and P=0.004, respectively), and absolute changes in SBP were larger in the drug-adjusted group (P=0.008). Ambulatory BPs changed in parallel to office BPs. Our data suggest that adjusted drug treatment has superior BP lowering effects compared with RDN in patients with true TRH. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01673516.

Serum uric acid is associated with new-onset diabetes in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: The LIFE Study.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether serum uric acid (SUA) is associated with development of new-onset diabetes (NOD) in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). The aim of the present investigation was to test the hypothesis that SUA predicts development of NOD in these patients. METHODS: In the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study, a double-masked, parallel-group design, 9,193 patients with hypertension and electrocardiographic LVH were randomized to losartan- or atenolol-based antihypertensive treatment and followed for a mean of 4.9 years. At baseline, 7,489 patients with available SUA measurements did not have diabetes mellitus and were thus at risk of its development during the study. We used Cox regression analyses to investigate whether SUA predicted development of NOD. RESULTS: NOD developed in 522 of 7,489 patients. The association between baseline SUA and development of NOD was significant (hazard ratio (HR) 1.29 per s.d. (1.3 mg/dl), 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.42, P < 0.001) after adjustment for treatment with losartan vs. atenolol, baseline serum glucose, urinary albumin/creatinine ratio, estimated glomerular filtration rate and Framingham risk score, time-varying systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and time-varying LVH by Cornell voltage-duration product and Sokolow-Lyon voltage. In parallel analyses, baseline quartiles of SUA were significantly associated with increasing NOD (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.18-1.40, P < 0.001). Time-varying SUA was also associated with NOD (HR 1.10 per s.d. [1.3 mg/dl], 95% CI 1.02-1.19, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that SUA is an independent risk marker for NOD in hypertensive patients with LVH.