Relationship Between Renin, Aldosterone, Aldosterone-to-Renin Ratio and Arterial Stiffness and Left Ventricular Mass Index in Young Adults.

BACKGROUND: Primary aldosteronism, characterized by renin-independent aldosterone production, is associated with adverse cardiovascular remodeling and outcomes. Elevated cardiovascular risk is observed even in subclinical forms of primary aldosteronism according to studies conducted primarily in middle-aged and elderly populations. This study aimed to assess whether early changes in primary aldosteronism biomarkers during young adulthood are associated with arterial stiffness and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) before the onset of overt disease. METHODS: The Raine Study is a longitudinal, population-based cohort study in Western Australia that enrolled women during pregnancy. We analyzed the data from the offspring of these women at 17 (2006-2009) and 27 (2016-2018) years of age. Participants with elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (>10 mg/L) and female participants who were on oral contraception were excluded. Pulse wave velocity and aortic augmentation index were measured by SphygmoCor Pulse Wave System at both ages, and aortic distensibility and LVMI were measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 27 years. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the relationship between plasma renin, aldosterone, or aldosterone-to-renin ratio and arterial stiffness and LVMI. Mediation analysis was used to test the role of systolic blood pressure. RESULTS: This study included 859 participants at 17 (38.0% female) and 758 participants at 27 (33.2% female) years of age. Females had lower renin concentration at both 17 (20.7 mU/L versus 25.7 mU/L; P<0.001) and 27 (12.0 mU/L versus 15.4 mU/L; P<0.001) years of age; hence, the aldosterone-to-renin ratio was significantly higher at both 17 (18.2 versus 13.5; P<0.001) and 27 (21.0 versus 15.6; P<0.001) years of age in females compared with males. At 27 years of age, a significant association was detected between aldosterone and LVMI in males (ß=0.009 [95% CI, 0.001-0.017]; P=0.027) and between aldosterone-to-renin ratio and LVMI in females (ß=0.098 [95% CI, 0.001-0.196]; P=0.050) independently of systolic blood pressure and other confounders. No association was found between primary aldosteronism biomarkers and measures of arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity, aortic augmentation index, and aortic distensibility) at either age. CONCLUSIONS: Aldosterone concentration and aldosterone-to-renin ratio were positively associated with the LVMI in young males and females, respectively, independently of systolic blood pressure. Long-term follow-up is required to determine whether the relationship persists over time, and clinical trials are needed to assess the cardiovascular benefits of early interventions to block aldosterone.

Efficacy and safety of a novel low-dose triple single-pill combination of telmisartan, amlodipine and indapamide, compared with dual combinations for treatment of hypertension: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, international clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-pill combinations (SPCs) of three low-dose antihypertensive drugs can improve hypertension control but are not widely available. A key issue for any combination product is the contribution of each component to efficacy and tolerability. This trial compared a new triple SPC called GMRx2, containing telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide, with dual combinations of components for efficacy and safety. METHODS: In this international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial, we enrolled adults with hypertension receiving between zero and three antihypertensive drugs, with a screening systolic blood pressure (SBP) ranging from 140-179 mm Hg (on no drugs) to 110-150 mm Hg (on three drugs). Participants were recruited from Australia, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Poland, Sri Lanka, the UK, and the USA. In a 4-week active run-in, existing medications were switched to GMRx2 half dose (telmisartan 20 mg, amlodipine 2·5 mg, and indapamide 1·25 mg). Participants were then randomly allocated (2:1:1:1) to continued GMRx2 half dose or to each possible dual combination of components at half doses (telmisartan 20 mg with amlodipine 2·5 mg, telmisartan 20 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg, or amlodipine 2·5 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg). At week 6, doses were doubled in all groups, unless there was a clinical contraindication. The primary efficacy outcome was mean change in home SBP from baseline to week 12, and the primary safety outcome was withdrawal of treatment due to an adverse event from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy outcomes included differences in clinic and home blood pressure levels and control rates. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04518293, and is completed. FINDINGS: The trial was conducted between July 9, 2021 and Sept 1, 2023. We randomly allocated 1385 participants to four groups: 551 to GMRx2, 276 to telmisartan-indapamide, 282 to telmisartan-amlodipine, and 276 to amlodipine-indapamide groups. The mean age was 59 years (SD 11), 712 (51%) participants self-reported as female and 673 (48·6%) male, and the mean clinic blood pressure at the screening visit was 142/85 mm Hg when taking an average of 1·6 blood pressure medications. Following the run-in on GMRx2 half dose, the mean clinic blood pressure level at randomisation was 133/81 mm Hg and the mean home blood pressure level was 129/78 mm Hg. At week 12, the mean home SBP was 126 mm Hg in the GMRx2 group, which was lower than for each of the dual combinations: -2·5 (95% CI -3·7 to -1·3, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-indapamide, -5·4 (-6·8 to -4·1, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-amlodipine, and -4·4 (-5·8 to -3·1, p<0·0001) versus amlodipine-indapamide. For the same comparisons, differences in clinic blood pressure at week 12 were 4·3/3·5 mm Hg, 5·6/3·7 mm Hg, and 6·3/4·5 mm Hg (all p<0·001). Clinic blood pressure control rate below 140/90 mm Hg at week 12 was superior with GMRx2 (74%) to with each dual combination (range 53-61%). Withdrawal of treatment due to adverse events occurred in 11 (2%) participants in the GMRx2 group, four (1%) in telmisartan-indapamide, three (1%) in telmisartan-amlodipine, and four (1%) in amlodipine-indapamide, with none of the differences being statistically significant. INTERPRETATION: A novel low-dose SPC product of telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide provided clinically meaningful improvements in blood pressure reduction compared with dual combinations and was well tolerated. This SPC provides a new therapeutic option for the management of hypertension and its use could result in a substantial improvement in blood pressure control in clinical practice. FUNDING: George Medicines.

May Measurement Month 2021: an analysis of blood pressure screening results from Australia.

May Measurement Month (MMM) is a global and national blood pressure (BP) screening campaign initiated by the International Society of Hypertension to improve awareness of BP worldwide. This study reports on the findings of the MMM21 campaign in Australia. Adult participants (≥18 years) were screened through opportunistic sampling across Australia between 1 May and 30 November 2021. Trained volunteers recorded standardized BP measurements from community volunteer participants along with demographic data, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and history of COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Hypertension was defined as systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg and/or taking antihypertensive medication. Data were collated and analysed centrally using the current MMM protocol and presented after the imputation of missing BP readings. A total of 1307 participants were screened in 2021, comprising 652 (49.9%) females and 654 (50.0%) males with a mean age of 48 years (SD 20.1). Of all 1307 participants, 524 (40.1%) had hypertension. Of participants with hypertension, 65.4% were aware and 59.3% were on antihypertensive medication. Of 311 participants on antihypertensive medication, 54.7% had controlled BP. Of all 524 participants with hypertension, 32.5% had controlled BP. The current 2021 data may indicate some progress in creating BP awareness; however, consecutive Australian data obtained since 2017 demonstrated stagnating treatment, and control rates compared with global rates and those in other high-income countries. Concerted efforts from all stakeholders will be required to further improve BP awareness, treatment, and control rates in Australia.

Hypertension management in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities.

Arterial hypertension is a leading cause of death globally. Due to ageing, the rising incidence of obesity, and socioeconomic and environmental changes, its incidence increases worldwide. Hypertension commonly coexists with Type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidaemia, sedentary lifestyle, and smoking leading to risk amplification. Blood pressure lowering by lifestyle modifications and antihypertensive drugs reduce cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. Guidelines recommend dual- and triple-combination therapies using renin-angiotensin system blockers, calcium channel blockers, and/or a diuretic. Comorbidities often complicate management. New drugs such as angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve CV and renal outcomes. Catheter-based renal denervation could offer an alternative treatment option in comorbid hypertension associated with increased sympathetic nerve activity. This review summarises the latest clinical evidence for managing hypertension with CV comorbidities.

Renal denervation in the management of hypertension in adults. A clinical consensus statement of the ESC Council on Hypertension and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI).

Since the publication of the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension (ESC/ESH) Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension, several high-quality studies, including randomised, sham-controlled trials on catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) were published, confirming both the blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy and safety of radiofrequency and ultrasound RDN in a broad range of patients with hypertension, including resistant hypertension. A clinical consensus document by the ESC Council on Hypertension and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) on RDN in the management of hypertension was considered necessary to inform clinical practice. This expert group proposes that RDN is an adjunct treatment option in uncontrolled resistant hypertension, confirmed by ambulatory BP measurements, despite best efforts at lifestyle and pharmacological interventions. RDN may also be used in patients who are unable to tolerate antihypertensive medications in the long term. A shared decision-making process is a key feature and preferably includes a patient who is well informed on the benefits and limitations of the procedure. The decision-making process should take (i) the patient's global cardiovascular (CV) risk and/or (ii) the presence of hypertension-mediated organ damage or CV complications into account. Multidisciplinary hypertension teams involving hypertension experts and interventionalists evaluate the indication and facilitate the RDN procedure. Interventionalists require expertise in renal interventions and specific training in RDN procedures. Centres performing these procedures require the skills and resources to deal with potential complications. Future research is needed to address open questions and investigate the impact of BP-lowering with RDN on clinical outcomes and potential clinical indications beyond hypertension.

Clinical Trial Design Principles and Outcomes Definitions for Device-Based Therapies for Hypertension: A Consensus Document From the Hypertension Academic Research Consortium.

The clinical implications of hypertension in addition to a high prevalence of both uncontrolled blood pressure and medication nonadherence promote interest in developing device-based approaches to hypertension treatment. The expansion of device-based therapies and ongoing clinical trials underscores the need for consistency in trial design, conduct, and definitions of clinical study elements to permit trial comparability and data poolability. Standardizing methods of blood pressure assessment, effectiveness measures beyond blood pressure alone, and safety outcomes are paramount. The Hypertension Academic Research Consortium (HARC) document represents an integration of evolving evidence and consensus opinion among leading experts in cardiovascular medicine and hypertension research with regulatory perspectives on clinical trial design and methodology. The HARC document integrates the collective information among device-based therapies for hypertension to better address existing challenges and identify unmet needs for technologies proposed to treat the world's leading cause of death and disability. Consistent with the Academic Research Consortium charter, this document proposes pragmatic consensus clinical design principles and outcomes definitions for studies aimed at evaluating device-based hypertension therapies.

Dual endothelin antagonist aprocitentan for resistant hypertension (PRECISION): a multicentre, blinded, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Resistant hypertension is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. The endothelin pathway has been implicated in the pathogenesis of hypertension, but it is currently not targeted therapeutically, thereby leaving this relevant pathophysiological pathway unopposed with currently available drugs. The aim of the study was to assess the blood pressure lowering efficacy of the dual endothelin antagonist aprocitentan in patients with resistant hypertension. METHODS: PRECISION was a multicentre, blinded, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 study, which was done in hospitals or research centres in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia. Patients were eligible for randomisation if their sitting systolic blood pressure was 140 mm Hg or higher despite taking standardised background therapy consisting of three antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic. The study consisted of three sequential parts: part 1 was the 4-week double-blind, randomised, and placebo-controlled part, in which patients received aprocitentan 12·5 mg, aprocitentan 25 mg, or placebo in a 1:1:1 ratio; part 2 was a 32-week single (patient)-blind part, in which all patients received aprocitentan 25 mg; and part 3 was a 12-week double-blind, randomised, and placebo-controlled withdrawal part, in which patients were re-randomised to aprocitentan 25 mg or placebo in a 1:1 ratio. The primary and key secondary endpoints were changes in unattended office systolic blood pressure from baseline to week 4 and from withdrawal baseline to week 40, respectively. Secondary endpoints included 24-h ambulatory blood pressure changes. The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03541174. FINDINGS: The PRECISION study was done from June 18, 2018, to April 25, 2022. 1965 individuals were screened and 730 were randomly assigned. Of these 730 patients, 704 (96%) completed part 1 of the study; of these, 613 (87%) completed part 2 and, of these, 577 (94%) completed part 3 of the study. The least square mean (SE) change in office systolic blood pressure at 4 weeks was -15·3 (SE 0·9) mm Hg for aprocitentan 12·5 mg, -15·2 (0·9) mm Hg for aprocitentan 25 mg, and -11·5 (0·9) mm Hg for placebo, for a difference versus placebo of -3·8 (1·3) mm Hg (97·5% CI -6·8 to -0·8, p=0·0042) and -3·7 (1·3) mm Hg (-6·7 to -0·8; p=0·0046), respectively. The respective difference for 24 h ambulatory systolic blood pressure was -4·2 mm Hg (95% CI -6·2 to -2·1) and -5·9 mm Hg (-7·9 to -3·8). After 4 weeks of withdrawal, office systolic blood pressure significantly increased with placebo versus aprocitentan (5·8 mm Hg, 95% CI 3·7 to 7·9, p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse event was mild-to-moderate oedema or fluid retention, occurring in 9%, 18%, and 2% for patients receiving aprocitentan 12·5 mg, 25 mg, and placebo, during the 4-week double-blind part, respectively. This event led to discontinuation in seven patients treated with aprocitentan. During the trial, a total of 11 treatment-emergent deaths occurred, none of which were regarded by the investigators to be related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: In patients with resistant hypertension, aprocitentan was well tolerated and superior to placebo in lowering blood pressure at week 4 with a sustained effect at week 40. FUNDING: Idorsia Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Biotech.

Device Therapy of Hypertension.

In the past decade, efforts to improve blood pressure control have looked beyond conventional approaches of lifestyle modification and drug therapy to embrace interventional therapies. Based upon animal and human studies clearly demonstrating a key role for the sympathetic nervous system in the etiology of hypertension, the newer technologies that have emerged are predominantly aimed at neuromodulation of peripheral nervous system targets. These include renal denervation, baroreflex activation therapy, endovascular baroreflex amplification therapy, carotid body ablation, and pacemaker-mediated programmable hypertension control. Of these, renal denervation is the most mature, and with a recent series of proof-of-concept trials demonstrating the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency and more recently ultrasound-based renal denervation, this technology is poised to become available as a viable treatment option for hypertension in the foreseeable future. With regard to baroreflex activation therapy, endovascular baroreflex amplification, carotid body ablation, and programmable hypertension control, these are developing technologies for which more human data are required. Importantly, central nervous system control of the circulation remains a poorly understood yet vital component of the hypertension pathway and mandates further investigation. Technology to improve blood pressure control through deep brain stimulation of key cardiovascular control territories is, therefore, of interest. Furthermore, alternative nonsympathomodulatory intervention targeting the hemodynamics of the circulation may also be worth exploring for patients in whom sympathetic drive is less relevant to hypertension perpetuation. Herein, we review the aforementioned technologies with an emphasis on the preclinical data that underpin their rationale and the human evidence that supports their use.

Dual Endothelin Antagonism with Aprocitentan as a Novel Therapeutic Approach for Resistant Hypertension.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Resistant hypertension (RH) defined as uncontrolled blood pressure despite the use of a combination of a renin-angiotensin system blocker, a calcium channel blocker, and a diuretic at maximally tolerated doses is associated with a substantially increased risk of cardiovascular and renal events. Despite targeting relevant pathophysiological pathways contributing to elevated blood pressure, approximately 10-15% of hypertensive patients remain above recommended blood pressure targets. Further optimization of blood pressure control is particularly challenging in patient populations who frequently present with RH such as elderly and patients with chronic kidney disease, due to the unfavorable safety profile of the recommended fourth-line therapy with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. This review explores the potential role of endothelin antagonists as an alternative fourth-line therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite the well-described role of the endothelin pathway in the pathogenesis of hypertension, it is currently not targeted therapeutically. Recently however, main outcome data from the PRECISION study, a randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, in patients with RH on guideline-recommended standardized single-pill background therapy convincingly demonstrated the safety and blood pressure-lowering efficacy of the dual endothelin antagonist Aprocitentan. Findings from the phase 3 PRECISION study could signify a turning point in the utilization of endothelin receptor antagonists as a standard treatment for patients with RH.

Willingness to be tested for a secondary cause of hypertension: a survey of the Australian general community.

BACKGROUND: Primary aldosteronism (PA) represents the most common and potentially curable cause of secondary hypertension. However, PA is not commonly screened for, and up to 34% of patients who screen positive do not complete the full diagnostic process. This suggests that the diagnostic process may pose a barrier to patients and may contribute to the under-diagnosis of PA. AIMS: To evaluate the willingness of the Australian general public to undergo testing for secondary causes of hypertension and identify enablers or barriers to testing from the patients' perspective. METHODS: An online survey containing questions on knowledge and attitudes towards hypertension, willingness to be tested and enablers/barriers towards testing was distributed to the Australian community. RESULTS: Of 520 adult respondents (mean age 50.4 years, SD 27.3 years; 28.8% hypertensive; 56.0% female), the majority of non-hypertensive and hypertensive respondents (82.7% vs 70.0%; P = 0.03) were willing to undergo testing for a secondary cause of hypertension that involved blood and urine tests. Greater knowledge of hypertensive risk modification strategies and complications was predictive of willingness to be tested, whereas age, sex, education level, geographic location, socio-economic status and cardiovascular comorbidities were not. The top three barriers to testing included fear of a serious underlying condition, lack of belief in further testing and increased stress associated with further testing. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of patients are willing to engage in testing for a secondary cause of hypertension. Education about the risks associated with hypertension and the testing process may overcome several barriers to testing.

The Impact of SGLT2 Inhibitors in the Heart and Kidneys Regardless of Diabetes Status.

Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) are two devastating diseases that may occur in nondiabetics or individuals with diabetes and, when combined, it is referred to as cardiorenal disease. The impact of cardiorenal disease on society, the economy and the healthcare system is enormous. Although there are numerous therapies for cardiorenal disease, one therapy showing a great deal of promise is sodium-dependent glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. The SGLT family member, SGLT2, is often implicated in the pathogenesis of a range of diseases, and the dysregulation of the activity of SGLT2 markedly effects the transport of glucose and sodium across the luminal membrane of renal cells. Inhibitors of SGLT2 were developed based on the antidiabetic action initiated by inhibiting renal glucose reabsorption, thereby increasing glucosuria. Of great medical significance, large-scale clinical trials utilizing a range of SGLT2 inhibitors have demonstrated both metabolic and biochemical benefits via numerous novel mechanisms, such as sympathoinhibition, which will be discussed in this review. In summary, SGLT2 inhibitors clearly exert cardio-renal protection in people with and without diabetes in both preclinical and clinical settings. This exciting class of inhibitors improve hyperglycemia, high blood pressure, hyperlipidemia and diabetic retinopathy via multiple mechanisms, of which many are yet to be elucidated.

Initial treatment with a single pill containing quadruple combination of quarter doses of blood pressure medicines versus standard dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension (QUARTET): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment inertia is a recognised barrier to blood pressure control, and simpler, more effective treatment strategies are needed. We hypothesised that a hypertension management strategy starting with a single pill containing ultra-low-dose quadruple combination therapy would be more effective than a strategy of starting with monotherapy. METHODS: QUARTET was a multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial among Australian adults (≥18 years) with hypertension, who were untreated or receiving monotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned to either treatment, that started with the quadpill (containing irbesartan at 37·5 mg, amlodipine at 1·25 mg, indapamide at 0·625 mg, and bisoprolol at 2·5 mg) or an indistinguishable monotherapy control (irbesartan 150 mg). If blood pressure was not at target, additional medications could be added in both groups, starting with amlodipine at 5 mg. Participants were randomly assigned using an online central randomisation service. There was a 1:1 allocation, stratified by site. Allocation was masked to all participants and study team members (including investigators and those assessing outcomes) except the manufacturer of the investigational product and one unmasked statistician. The primary outcome was difference in unattended office systolic blood pressure at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included blood pressure control (standard office blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg), safety, and tolerability. A subgroup continued randomly assigned allocation to 12 months to assess long-term effects. Analyses were per intention to treat. This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616001144404, and is now complete. FINDINGS: From June 8, 2017, to Aug 31, 2020, 591 participants were recruited, with 743 assessed for eligibility, 152 ineligible or declined, 300 participants randomly assigned to intervention of initial quadpill treatment, and 291 to control of initial standard dose monotherapy treatment. The mean age of the 591 participants was 59 years (SD 12); 356 (60%) were male and 235 (40%) were female; 483 (82%) were White, 70 (12%) were Asian, and 38 (6%) reported as other ethnicity; and baseline mean unattended office blood pressure was 141 mm Hg (SD 13)/85 mm Hg (SD 10). By 12 weeks, 44 (15%) of 300 participants had additional blood pressure medications in the intervention group compared with 115 (40%) of 291 participants in the control group. Systolic blood pressure was lower by 6·9 mm Hg (95% CI 4·9-8·9; p<0·0001) and blood pressure control rates were higher in the intervention group (76%) versus control group (58%; relative risk [RR] 1·30, 95% CI 1·15-1·47; p<0·0001). There was no difference in adverse event-related treatment withdrawals at 12 weeks (intervention 4·0% vs control 2·4%; p=0·27). Among the 417 patients who continued, uptitration occurred more frequently among control participants than intervention participants (p<0·0001). However, at 52 weeks mean unattended systolic blood pressure remained lower by 7·7 mm Hg (95% CI 5·2-10·3) and blood pressure control rates higher in the intervention group (81%) versus control group (62%; RR 1·32, 95% CI 1·16-1·50). In all randomly assigned participants up to 12 weeks, there were seven (3%) serious adverse events in the intervention group and three (1%) serious adverse events in the control group. INTERPRETATION: A strategy with early treatment of a fixed-dose quadruple quarter-dose combination achieved and maintained greater blood pressure lowering compared with the common strategy of starting monotherapy. This trial demonstrated the efficacy, tolerability, and simplicity of a quadpill-based strategy. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.

Interaction between sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 and the sympathetic nervous system.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have taken centre stage in research and therapeutic efforts to modulate hard clinical outcomes in patients with heightened cardiovascular and renal risk profiles. Sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activation is a prominent feature across several cardiovascular and renal disease states. This review reflects on the remarkable clinical impact of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes, and navigates the evidence for a proposed clinically relevant interaction between SGLT2 and the SNS. RECENT FINDINGS: SGLT2 inhibitors exert several pleiotropic effects beyond glucose-lowering. These include, but are not limited to, diuresis and natriuresis, blood pressure lowering, reduction in inflammation and oxidative stress, stimulation of erythropoiesis, and improvement in cardiac energetics. Treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors is associated with significant improvement in cardiorenal outcomes irrespective of diabetes status. In addition, evidence from preclinical studies points to a strong signal of a bidirectional temporal association between SGLT2 inhibition and reduction in SNS activation. SUMMARY: Ongoing preclinical and clinical trials aimed at unravelling the proposed interaction between SGLT and SNS will enhance our understanding of their individual and/or collective contributions to cardiovascular disease progression and guide future targeted therapeutic interventions.

Renal denervation in patients with versus without chronic kidney disease: results from the Global SYMPLICITY Registry with follow-up data of 3 years.

BACKGROUND: Activity of the sympathetic nervous system is increased in patients with hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Here we compare short- and long-term blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects of renal denervation (RDN) between hypertensive patients with or without CKD in the Global SYMPLICITY Registry. METHODS: Office and 24-h ambulatory BP (ABP) were assessed at prespecified time points after RDN. The presence of CKD was defined according to the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and enrolled patients were stratified based on the presence (n = 475, eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or absence (n = 1505, eGFR ≥60mL/min/1.73 m2) of CKD. RESULTS: Patients with CKD were older (P < 0.001) and were prescribed more antihypertensive medications (P < 0.001). eGFR decline per year was not significantly different between groups after the first year. Office and 24-h ABP were significantly reduced from baseline at all time points after RDN in both groups (all P < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline data, patients without CKD had a greater reduction in office systolic BP (-17.3 ± 28.3 versus -11.7 ± 29.9 mmHg; P = 0.009) but not diastolic BP at 36 months compared with those with CKD. Similar BP and eGFR results were found when the analysis was limited to patients with both baseline and 36-month BP data available. There was no difference in the safety profile of the RDN procedure between groups. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for baseline data, 24-h systolic and diastolic ABP reduction were similar in patients with and without CKD after RDN, whereas office systolic but not diastolic BP was reduced less in patients with CKD. We conclude that RDN is an effective antihypertensive treatment option in CKD patients.

Targeting Features of the Metabolic Syndrome Through Sympatholytic Effects of SGLT2 Inhibition.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The moderate glucose-lowering effect of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors is unlikely to explain SGLT2 inhibitor-mediated beneficial outcomes, and unravelling the underlying mechanisms is a high priority in the research community. Given the dominant pathophysiologic role of the sympathetic nervous system activation in conditions such as hypertension and perturbed glucose homeostasis, it is pertinent to postulate that SGLT2 inhibitors may exert their beneficial effects at least in part via sympathetic inhibition. RECENT FINDINGS: SGLT2 inhibitors have shown enormous potential to improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes, and their therapeutic potential is currently being investigated in a range of associated comorbidities such as heart failure and chronic kidney disease. Indeed, recent experimental data in relevant animal models highlight a bidirectional interaction between sympathetic nervous system activation and SGLT2 expression, and this facilitates several of the features associated with SGLT2 inhibition observed in clinical trials including improved glucose metabolism, weight loss, increased diuresis, and lowering of blood pressure. Currently available data highlight the various levels of interaction between the sympathetic nervous system and SGLT2 expression and explores the potential for SGLT2 inhibition as a therapeutic strategy in conditions commonly characterised by sympathetic activation.

No Evidence for Long Term Blood Pressure Differences Between Eversion and Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy in Two Independent Study Cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: Blood pressure (BP) management is a vital aspect of stroke prevention and post-stroke care. Different surgical carotid endarterectomy (CEA) techniques may impact on BP control post-operatively. Specifically, the carotid sinus nerve, which innervates the carotid baroreceptors and carotid body, is commonly left intact during conventional CEA but is routinely transected as part of eversion CEA. The aim of this study was to assess long term BP control after eversion and conventional CEA. METHODS: Patients from the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS cohort) and a personal series of patients from the Stroke Clinical Trials Unit at University College London (UCL cohort) were separately analysed and divided into eversion and conventional CEA groups. Mixed effect linear models were fitted and adjusted for baseline demographic data and antihypertensive treatment to test for changes in BP from baseline over a three year follow up period after the respective procedures. RESULTS: There were no differences in changes in baseline BP readings and follow up readings between eversion and conventional CEA in the ICSS or UCL cohorts. In the ICSS cohort a mild but significant systolic (-8.6 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.6 - -6.6) and diastolic (-4.9 mmHg; 95% CI -6.0 - -3.8) BP lowering effect was evident at discharge in the conventional group but not in the eversion CEA group. BP monitoring during follow up did not reveal any consistent BP changes with either conventional or eversion CEA vs. baseline levels. CONCLUSION: Neither conventional nor eversion CEA seem to result in clinically significant long term BP changes. Potential concerns related to either short or long term alterations in BP levels with transection of the carotid sinus nerve during eversion CEA could not be substantiated.

Evaluation of Circulating Platelet Extracellular Vesicles and Hypertension Mediated Organ Damage.

Elevated circulating platelet-derived extracellular vesicles (pEVs) have been associated with arterial hypertension. The role of hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD) to induce EV release is still unknown. We studied the micro- and macro-vascular changes (retinal vascular density and pulse wave velocity), endothelial function (flow-mediated vasodilation of brachial artery and finger plethysmography), and assessed the psychosocial status (anxiety and depression) in hypertensive patients to determine their relationship with EV release. Pulse wave velocity showed a significant positive correlation with pEVs (r = 0.33; p = 0.01). Systolic blood pressure (SBP) negatively correlated with retinal vascularity. The superficial retinal vascular plexus density in the whole image showed a significant negative correlation with 24 h SBP (r = −0.38, p < 0.01), day-SBP (r = −0.35, p = 0.01), and night-SBP (r = −0.27, p = 0.04). pEVs did not show significant associations with microvascular damage (retinal vascular density), endothelial function (flow-mediated vasodilation of brachial artery and finger plethysmography), or psychosocial status (anxiety and depression). Our results indicate that the pEV levels were associated with macrovascular damage measured by PWV, whereas no significant association between pEVs and microvascular damage, endothelial function, or emotional status could be detected. The potential utility of pEV in clinical practice in the context of HMOD may be limited to macrovascular changes.

Association of Circulating Platelet Extracellular Vesicles and Pulse Wave Velocity with Cardiovascular Risk Estimation.

Elevated circulating platelet-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been reported in conditions associated with thrombotic risk. The present study aimed to assess the relationship between circulating platelet-derived EV levels, cardiovascular risk stratification and vascular organ damage, as assessed by pulse wave velocity (PWV). A total of 92 patients were included in the present analysis. Platelet EV were evaluated by flow cytometry (CD41+/Annexin v+). The cardiovascular risk was determined using the 2021 ESC guideline stratification and SCORE2 and SCORE-OP. PWV was performed as a surrogate to assess macrovascular damage. Risk stratification revealed significant group differences in EV levels (ANOVA, p = 0.04). Post hoc analysis demonstrated significantly higher levels of EVs in the very high-risk group compared with the young participants (12.53 ± 8.69 vs. 7.51 ± 4.67 EV/µL, p = 0.03). Linear regression models showed SCORE2 and SCORE-OP (p = 0.04) was a predictor of EV levels. EVs showed a significant association with macrovascular organ damage measured by PWV (p = 0.01). PWV progressively increased with more severe cardiovascular risk (p < 0.001) and was also associated with SCORE2 and SCORE-OP (p < 0.001). Within the pooled group of subjects with low to moderate risk and young participants (<40 years), those with EV levels in the highest tertile had a trend towards higher nocturnal blood pressure levels, fasting glucose concentration, lipid levels, homocysteine and PWV. Levels of platelet-derived EVs were highest in those patients with very high CV risk. Within a pooled group of patients with low to moderate risk, an unfavourable cardiometabolic profile was present with higher EV levels.

Effects of testosterone treatment, with and without exercise training, on ambulatory blood pressure in middle-aged and older men.

CONTEXT: With age, testosterone (T) and physical activity levels often decline in parallel. The effect of combining T treatment and exercise training on ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess T and exercise effects, alone and in combination, on ABP in men aged 50-70 years, waist circumference ≥ 95 cm and low-normal serum T (6-14 nmol/L), without organic hypogonadism. DESIGN: A 2 × 2 factorial randomised, placebo-controlled study. INTERVENTION: Randomization to daily transdermal AndroForte5® (Testosterone 5.0%w/v, 100 mg in 2 ml) cream (T), or matching placebo (P) (double-blind), and to supervised exercise (Ex) or no additional exercise (NEx), for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Average 24-h systolic blood pressure (SBP) increased with T treatment (testosterone*time, p = .035). Average 24-h SBP increased in T+Ex (T+Ex:+3.0 vs. P+NEx: -3.0 mmHg, p = .026) driven by day-time changes (T+Ex:+3.5 vs. P+NEx: -3.0 mmHg, p = .026). There was an effect of T for 24-h average diastolic blood pressure (DBP, testosterone*time, p = .044) driven by the decrease in P+Ex (P+Ex: -3.9 vs. T+NEx: -0.5 mmHg, p = .015). Night-time DBP was lower with exercise (P+Ex: -4.0 vs. P+NEx: +0.7 mmHg, p = .032). The effect of exercise to lower night-time DBP was not apparent in the presence of T (T+Ex: -0.4 vs. P+NEx: +0.7 mmHg, p > .05). Ex increased average 24-h pulse pressure (PP, exercise*time, p = .022), largely during daytime hours (exercise*time, p = .013). CONCLUSIONS: There was a main effect of T to increase 24-h SBP, primarily seen when T was combined with Ex. Exercise alone decreased 24-h and night-time DBP; an effect attenuated by T. BP should be carefully assessed and monitored, when prescribing T treatment to middle-aged and older men, especially when combined with exercise training.

Lipoprotein (a) and Hypertension.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of the associations between elevated blood pressure and lipoprotein (a) and possible causal links, as well as data on the prevalence of elevated lipoprotein (a) in a cohort of hypertensive patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Elevated lipoprotein (a) is now considered to be an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve disease. Despite this, there are limited data demonstrating an association between elevated lipoprotein (a) and hypertension. Further, there is limited mechanistic data linking lipoprotein (a) and hypertension through either renal impairment or direct effects on the vasculature. Despite the links between lipoprotein (a) and atherosclerosis, there are limited data demonstrating an association with hypertension. Evidence from our clinic suggests that ~ 30% of the patients in this at-risk, hypertensive cohort had elevated lipoprotein (a) levels and that measurement of lipoprotein (a) maybe useful in risk stratification.