Treatment for Mild Chronic Hypertension during Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The benefits and safety of the treatment of mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure, <160/100 mm Hg) during pregnancy are uncertain. Data are needed on whether a strategy of targeting a blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg reduces the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes without compromising fetal growth. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized trial, we assigned pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension and singleton fetuses at a gestational age of less than 23 weeks to receive antihypertensive medications recommended for use in pregnancy (active-treatment group) or to receive no such treatment unless severe hypertension (systolic pressure, ≥160 mm Hg; or diastolic pressure, ≥105 mm Hg) developed (control group). The primary outcome was a composite of preeclampsia with severe features, medically indicated preterm birth at less than 35 weeks' gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. The safety outcome was small-for-gestational-age birth weight below the 10th percentile for gestational age. Secondary outcomes included composites of serious neonatal or maternal complications, preeclampsia, and preterm birth. RESULTS: A total of 2408 women were enrolled in the trial. The incidence of a primary-outcome event was lower in the active-treatment group than in the control group (30.2% vs. 37.0%), for an adjusted risk ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.92; P<0.001). The percentage of small-for-gestational-age birth weights below the 10th percentile was 11.2% in the active-treatment group and 10.4% in the control group (adjusted risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.31; P = 0.76). The incidence of serious maternal complications was 2.1% and 2.8%, respectively (risk ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.26), and the incidence of severe neonatal complications was 2.0% and 2.6% (risk ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.30). The incidence of any preeclampsia in the two groups was 24.4% and 31.1%, respectively (risk ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.89), and the incidence of preterm birth was 27.5% and 31.4% (risk ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: In pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension, a strategy of targeting a blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg was associated with better pregnancy outcomes than a strategy of reserving treatment only for severe hypertension, with no increase in the risk of small-for-gestational-age birth weight. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; CHAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02299414.).

Blood pressure control in pregnant patients with chronic hypertension and diabetes: should <130/80 be the target?

BACKGROUND: The Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy Study demonstrated that a target blood pressure of <140/90 mm Hg during pregnancy is associated with improved perinatal outcomes. Outside of pregnancy, pharmacologic therapy for patients with diabetes and hypertension is adjusted to a target blood pressure of <130/80 mm Hg. During pregnancy, patients with both diabetes and chronic hypertension may also benefit from tighter control with a target blood pressure <130/80 mm Hg. OBJECTIVE: We compared perinatal outcomes in patients with hypertension and diabetes who achieved blood pressure <130/80 vs 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a multcenter randomized controlled trial. Participants were included in this secondary analysis if they had diabetes diagnosed prior to pregnancy or at <20 weeks of gestation and at least 2 recorded blood pressure measurements prior to delivery. Average systolic and diastolic blood pressure were calculated using ambulatory antenatal blood pressures. The primary composite outcome was preeclampsia with severe features, indicated preterm birth <35 weeks, or placental abruption. Secondary outcomes were components of the primary outcome, cesarean delivery, fetal or neonatal death, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and small for gestational age. Comparisons were made between those with an average systolic blood pressure <130 mm Hg and average diastolic blood pressure <80 mm Hg and those with an average systolic blood pressure 130 to 139 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure 80 to 89 mm Hg using Student's t test and chi-squared tests. Multivariable log-binomial regression models were used to evaluate risk ratios between blood pressure groups for dichotomous outcomes while accounting for baseline covariates. RESULTS: Of 434 participants included, 150 (34.6%) had an average blood pressure less than 130/80 mm Hg. Participants with an average blood pressure less than 130/80 were more likely to be on antihypertensive medications at the start of pregnancy and more likely to have newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus prior to 20 weeks. Participants with an average blood pressure less than 130/80 mm Hg were less likely to have the primary adverse perinatal outcome (19.3% vs 46.5%, adjusted relative risk 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.30-0.61, P<.01), with decreased risks specifically of preeclampsia with severe features (adjusted relative risk 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.54) and indicated preterm birth prior to 35 weeks (adjusted relative risk 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.79). The risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission was lower in the lower blood pressure group (adjusted relative risk 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.94). No differences were noted in cesarean delivery (adjusted relative risk 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.90-1.20), fetal or neonatal death (adjusted relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.12-2.92). Small for gestational age less than the 10th percentile was lower in the lower blood pressure group (adjusted relative risk 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.96). CONCLUSION: In those with chronic hypertension and diabetes prior to 20 weeks, achieving an average goal blood pressure of <130/80 mm Hg may be associated with improved perinatal outcomes.

Implementing the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Strategic Vision in the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences-2022 Update.

Spurred by the 2016 release of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Strategic Vision, the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences developed its Strategic Vision Implementation Plan-a blueprint for reigniting the decline in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality rates, improving health equity, and accelerating translation of scientific discoveries into better cardiovascular health (CVH). The 6 scientific focus areas of the Strategic Vision Implementation Plan reflect the multifactorial nature of CVD and include (1) addressing social determinants of CVH and health inequities, (2) enhancing resilience, (3) promoting CVH and preventing CVD across the lifespan, (4) eliminating hypertension-related CVD, (5) reducing the burden of heart failure, and (6) preventing vascular dementia. This article presents an update of strategic vision implementation activities within Division of Cardiovascular Sciences. Overarching and cross-cutting themes include training the scientific workforce and engaging the extramural scientific community to stimulate transformative research in cardiovascular sciences. In partnership with other NIH Institutes, Federal agencies, industry, and the extramural research community, Division of Cardiovascular Sciences strategic vision implementation has stimulated development of numerous workshops and research funding opportunities. Strategic Vision Implementation Plan activities highlight innovative intervention modalities, interdisciplinary systems approaches to CVD reduction, a life course framework for CVH promotion and CVD prevention, and multi-pronged research strategies for combatting COVID-19. As new knowledge, technologies, and areas of scientific research emerge, Division of Cardiovascular Sciences will continue its thoughtful approach to strategic vision implementation, remaining poised to seize emerging opportunities and catalyze breakthroughs in cardiovascular sciences.

Scientific opportunities in resilience research for cardiovascular health and wellness. Report from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute workshop.

Exposure of biological systems to acute or chronic insults triggers a host of molecular and physiological responses to either tolerate, adapt, or fully restore homeostasis; these responses constitute the hallmarks of resilience. Given the many facets, dimensions, and discipline-specific focus, gaining a shared understanding of "resilience" has been identified as a priority for supporting advances in cardiovascular health. This report is based on the working definition: "Resilience is the ability of living systems to successfully maintain or return to homeostasis in response to physical, molecular, individual, social, societal, or environmental stressors or challenges," developed after considering many factors contributing to cardiovascular resilience through deliberations of multidisciplinary experts convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during a workshop entitled: "Enhancing Resilience for Cardiovascular Health and Wellness." Some of the main emerging themes that support the possibility of enhancing resilience for cardiovascular health include optimal energy management and substrate diversity, a robust immune system that safeguards tissue homeostasis, and social and community support. The report also highlights existing research challenges, along with immediate and long-term opportunities for resilience research. Certain immediate opportunities identified are based on leveraging existing high-dimensional data from longitudinal clinical studies to identify vascular resilience measures, create a 'resilience index,' and adopt a life-course approach. Long-term opportunities include developing quantitative cell/organ/system/community models to identify resilience factors and mechanisms at these various levels, designing experimental and clinical interventions that specifically assess resilience, adopting global sharing of resilience-related data, and cross-domain training of next-generation researchers in this field.

Perspectives on Cognitive Phenotypes and Models of Vascular Disease.

Clinical investigations have established that vascular-associated medical conditions are significant risk factors for various kinds of dementia. And yet, we are unable to associate certain types of vascular deficiencies with specific cognitive impairments. The reasons for this are many, not the least of which are that most vascular disorders are multi-factorial and the development of vascular dementia in humans is often a multi-year or multi-decade progression. To better study vascular disease and its underlying causes, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health has invested considerable resources in the development of animal models that recapitulate various aspects of human vascular disease. Many of these models, mainly in the mouse, are based on genetic mutations, frequently using single-gene mutations to examine the role of specific proteins in vascular function. These models could serve as useful tools for understanding the association of specific vascular signaling pathways with specific neurological and cognitive impairments related to dementia. To advance the state of the vascular dementia field and improve the information sharing between the vascular biology and neurobehavioral research communities, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a workshop to bring in scientists from these knowledge domains to discuss the potential utility of establishing a comprehensive phenotypic cognitive assessment of a selected set of existing mouse models, representative of the spectrum of vascular disorders, with particular attention focused on age, sex, and rigor and reproducibility. The workshop highlighted the potential of associating well-characterized vascular disease models, with validated cognitive outcomes, that can be used to link specific vascular signaling pathways with specific cognitive and neurobehavioral deficits.

Exploring the Role of Endothelial Cell Resilience in Cardiovascular Health and Disease.

Traditionally, much research effort has been invested into focusing on disease, understanding pathogenic mechanisms, identifying risk factors, and developing effective treatments. A few recent studies unraveling the basis for absence of disease, including cardiovascular disease, despite existing risk factors, a phenomenon commonly known as resilience, are adding new knowledge and suggesting novel therapeutic approaches. Given the central role of endothelial function in cardiovascular health, we herein provide a number of considerations that warrant future research and considering a paradigm shift toward identifying the molecular underpinnings of endothelial resilience.

Implementing the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Strategic Vision in the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences.

As we commemorate the 70th Anniversary of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and celebrate important milestones that have been achieved by the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences (DCVS), it is imperative that DCVS and the Extramural Research community at-large continue to address critical public health challenges that persist within the area of Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD). The NHLBI's Strategic Vision, developed with extensive input from the extramural research community and published in 2016, included overarching goals and strategic objectives that serve to provide a general blueprint for sustaining the legacy of the Institute by leveraging opportunities in emerging scientific areas (e.g., regenerative medicine, omics technology, data science, precision medicine, and mobile health), finding new ways to address enduring challenges (e.g., social determinants of health, health inequities, prevention, and health promotion), and training the next generation of heart, lung, blood, and sleep researchers. DCVS has developed a strategic vision implementation plan to provide a cardiovascular framing for the pursuit of the Institute's overarching goals and strategic objectives garnered from the input of the broader NHLBI community. This plan highlights six scientific focus areas that demonstrate a cross-cutting and multifaceted approach to addressing cardiovascular sciences, including 1) addressing social determinants of cardiovascular health (CVH) and health inequities, 2) enhancing resilience, 3) promoting CVH and preventing CVD Across the lifespan, 4) eliminating hypertension-related CVD, 5) reducing the burden of heart failure, and 6) preventing vascular dementia. These priorities will guide our efforts in Institute-driven activities in the coming years but will not exclude development of other novel ideas or the support of investigator-initiated grant awards. The DCVS Strategic Vision implementation plan is a living document that will evolve with iterative dialogue with the NHLBI community and adapt as the dynamic scientific landscape changes to seize emerging opportunities.

Unlocking the Secrets of Mitochondria in the Cardiovascular System: Path to a Cure in Heart Failure­A Report from the 2018 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop

Mitochondria have emerged as a central factor in the pathogenesis and progression of heart failure, and other cardiovascular diseases, as well, but no therapies are available to treat mitochondrial dysfunction. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a group of leading experts in heart failure, cardiovascular diseases, and mitochondria research in August 2018. These experts reviewed the current state of science and identified key gaps and opportunities in basic, translational, and clinical research focusing on the potential of mitochondria-based therapeutic strategies in heart failure. The workshop provided short- and long-term recommendations for moving the field toward clinical strategies for the prevention and treatment of heart failure and cardiovascular diseases by using mitochondria-based approaches.

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID): A report from the 2018 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Workshop.

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) are characterized by the aging neurovascular unit being confronted with and failing to cope with biological insults due to systemic and cerebral vascular disease, proteinopathy including Alzheimer's biology, metabolic disease, or immune response, resulting in cognitive decline. This report summarizes the discussion and recommendations from a working group convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke to evaluate the state of the field in VCID research, identify research priorities, and foster collaborations. As discussed in this report, advances in understanding the biological mechanisms of VCID across the wide spectrum of pathologies, chronic systemic comorbidities, and other risk factors may lead to potential prevention and new treatment strategies to decrease the burden of dementia. Better understanding of the social determinants of health that affect risks for both vascular disease and VCID could provide insight into strategies to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in VCID.

Deciphering the Role of Lipid Droplets in Cardiovascular Disease: A Report From the 2017 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop.

Lipid droplets (LDs) are distinct and dynamic organelles that affect the health of cells and organs. Much progress has been made in understanding how these structures are formed, how they interact with other cellular organelles, how they are used for storage of triacylglycerol in adipose tissue, and how they regulate lipolysis. Our understanding of the biology of LDs in the heart and vascular tissue is relatively primitive in comparison with LDs in adipose tissue and liver. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a working group to discuss how LDs affect cardiovascular diseases. The goal of the working group was to examine the current state of knowledge on the cell biology of LDs, including current methods to study them in cells and organs and reflect on how LDs influence the development and progression of cardiovascular diseases. This review summarizes the working group discussion and recommendations on research areas ripe for future investigation that will likely improve our understanding of atherosclerosis and heart function.

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the translation of cardiovascular discoveries into therapeutic approaches.

The molecular causes of ≈4000 medical conditions have been described, yet only 5% have associated therapies. For decades, the average time for drug development through approval has taken 10 to 20 years. In recent years, the serious challenges that confront the private sector have made it difficult to capitalize on new opportunities presented by advances in genomics and cellular therapies. Current trends are disturbing. Pharmaceutical companies are reducing their investments in research, and biotechnology companies are struggling to obtain venture funds. To support early-stage translation of the discoveries in basic science, the National Institutes of Health and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute have developed new approaches to facilitating the translation of basic discoveries into clinical applications and will continue to develop a variety of programs that create teams of academic investigators and industry partners. The goal of these programs is to maximize the public benefit of investment of taxpayer dollars in biomedical research and to lessen the risk required for industry partners to make substantial investments. This article highlights several examples of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-initiated translational programs and National Institutes of Health translational resources designed to catalyze and enable the earliest stages of the biomedical product development process. The translation of latest discoveries into therapeutic approaches depends on continued federal funding to enhance the early stages of the product development process and to stimulate and catalyze partnerships between academia, industry, and other sources of capital.

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia including Alzheimer's disease.

Scientific evidence continues to demonstrate the linkage of vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia such as Alzheimer's disease. In December, 2013, the Alzheimer's Association, with scientific input from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute from the National Institutes of Health, convened scientific experts to discuss the research gaps in our understanding of how vascular factors contribute to Alzheimer's disease and related dementia. This manuscript summarizes the meeting and the resultant discussion, including an outline of next steps needed to move this area of research forward.

Pregnancy Outcomes of Nifedipine Compared With Labetalol for Oral Treatment of Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by type of antihypertensive used in participants of the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of CHAP, an open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment compared with standard care (no treatment unless severe hypertension developed) in pregnant patients with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure 140-159/90-104 mm Hg before 20 weeks of gestation) and singleton pregnancies. We performed three comparisons based on medications prescribed at enrollment: labetalol compared with standard care, nifedipine compared with standard care, and labetalol compared with nifedipine. Although active compared with standard care groups were randomized, medication assignment within the active treatment group was not random but based on clinician or patient preference. The primary outcome was the occurrence of superimposed preeclampsia with severe features, preterm birth before 35 weeks of gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. The key secondary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) neonates. We also compared medication adverse effects between groups. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated with log binomial regression to adjust for confounding. RESULTS: Of 2,292 participants analyzed, 720 (31.4%) received labetalol, 417 (18.2%) received nifedipine, and 1,155 (50.4%) received no treatment. The mean gestational age at enrollment was 10.5±3.7 weeks; nearly half of participants (47.5%) identified as non-Hispanic Black; and 44.5% used aspirin. The primary outcome occurred in 217 (30.1%), 130 (31.2%), and 427 (37.0%) in the labetalol, nifedipine, and standard care groups, respectively. Risk of the primary outcome was lower among those receiving treatment (labetalol use vs standard adjusted RR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; nifedipine use vs standard adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI, 0.71-0.99), but there was no significant difference in risk when labetalol was compared with nifedipine (adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.82-1.18). There were no significant differences in SGA or serious adverse events between participants receiving labetalol and those receiving nifedipine. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in predetermined maternal or neonatal outcomes were detected on the basis of the use of labetalol or nifedipine for treatment of chronic hypertension in pregnancy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02299414.

Effects of Antihypertensive Therapy During Pregnancy on Postpartum Blood Pressure Control.

OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in postpartum blood pressure (BP) control (BP below 140/90 mm Hg) for participants with hypertension randomized to receive antihypertensive treatment compared with no treatment during pregnancy. METHODS: This study was a planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (The CHAP [Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy] trial). Pregnant participants with mild chronic hypertension (BP below 160/105 mm Hg) were randomized into two groups: active (antihypertensive treatment) or control (no treatment unless severe hypertension, BP 160/105 mm Hg or higher). Study outcomes were BP control below 140/90 mm Hg (primary) and medication nonadherence based on a composite score threshold (secondary) at the 6-week postpartum follow-up visit. Participants without follow-up BP measurements were excluded from analysis of the BP control outcome. Participants without health care professional-prescribed antihypertensives at delivery were excluded from the analysis of the adherence outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of 2,408 participants, 1,684 (864 active, 820 control) were included in the analysis. A greater percentage of participants in the active group achieved BP control (56.7% vs 51.5%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.22, 95% CI, 1.00-1.48) than in the control group. Postpartum antihypertensive prescription was higher in the active group (81.7% vs 58.4%, P <.001), and nonadherence did not differ significantly between groups (aOR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.64-1.03). CONCLUSION: Antihypertensive treatment of mild chronic hypertension during pregnancy was associated with better BP control below 140/90 mm Hg in the immediate postpartum period.

Optimal Timing of Delivery for Pregnant Individuals With Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the optimal gestational age to deliver pregnant people with chronic hypertension to improve perinatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of chronic hypertension treatment to different blood pressure goals. Participants with term, singleton gestations were included. Those with fetal anomalies and those with a diagnosis of preeclampsia before 37 weeks of gestation were excluded. The primary maternal composite outcome included death, serious morbidity (heart failure, stroke, encephalopathy, myocardial infarction, pulmonary edema, intensive care unit admission, intubation, renal failure), preeclampsia with severe features, hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, or abruption. The primary neonatal outcome included fetal or neonatal death, respiratory support beyond oxygen mask, Apgar score less than 3 at 5 minutes, neonatal seizures, or suspected sepsis. Secondary outcomes included intrapartum cesarean birth, length of stay, neonatal intensive care unit admission, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), transient tachypnea of the newborn, and hypoglycemia. Those with a planned delivery were compared with those expectantly managed at each gestational week. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs are reported. RESULTS: We included 1,417 participants with mild chronic hypertension; 305 (21.5%) with a new diagnosis in pregnancy and 1,112 (78.5%) with known preexisting hypertension. Groups differed by body mass index (BMI) and preexisting diabetes. In adjusted models, there was no association between planned delivery and the primary maternal or neonatal composite outcome in any gestational age week compared with expectant management. Planned delivery at 37 weeks of gestation was associated with RDS (7.9% vs 3.0%, aOR 2.70, 95% CI, 1.40-5.22), and planned delivery at 37 and 38 weeks was associated with neonatal hypoglycemia (19.4% vs 10.7%, aOR 1.97, 95% CI, 1.27-3.08 in week 37; 14.4% vs 7.7%, aOR 1.82, 95% CI, 1.06-3.10 in week 38). CONCLUSION: Planned delivery in the early-term period compared with expectant management was not associated with a reduction in adverse maternal outcomes. However, it was associated with increased odds of some neonatal complications. Delivery timing for individuals with mild chronic hypertension should weigh maternal and neonatal outcomes in each gestational week but may be optimized by delivery at 39 weeks.

Next steps: Operationalizing resilience research.

The National Institutes of Health have recently gathered internal and external input towards a shared understanding of resilience in the wide context of human health and the biomedical sciences that would help accelerate advances in human health and its maintenance. We suggest the current view that resilience refers in general to a system's capacity to recover, grow, adapt, or resist perturbation from a challenge or stressor. To help harmonize the design and reporting of resilience research studies across multiple domains we have developed and are proposing a Resilience Research Design (ResD) Tool. Researchers can use the Resilience ResD Tool to proceed through a flowchart of six questions that will guide identification of key features in a resilience research study. Through this special supplement, we have shown the application of the Resilience ResD Tool and suggest opportunities and gaps with respect to next steps towards operationalizing resilience research.