New Insights on the Mechanisms of Myocardial Injury in Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Myocardial injury is common in hypertensive patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Immune dysregulation could be associated to cardiac injury in these patients, but the underlying mechanism has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: All patients were selected prospectively from a multicenter registry of adults hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19. Cases had hypertension and myocardial injury, defined by troponin levels above the 99th percentile upper reference limit, and controls were hypertensive patients with no myocardial injury. Biomarkers and immune cell subsets were quantified and compared between the two groups. A multiple logistic regression model was used to analyze the associations of clinical and immune variables with myocardial injury. RESULTS: The sample comprised 193 patients divided into two groups: 47 cases and 146 controls. Relative to controls, cases had lower total lymphocyte count, percentage of T lymphocytes, CD8+CD38+ mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), and percentage of CD8+ human leukocyte antigen DR isotope (HLA-DR)+ CD38-cells and higher percentage of natural killer lymphocytes, natural killer group 2A (NKG2A)+ MFI, percentage of CD8+CD38+cells, CD8+HLA-DR+MFI, CD8+NKG2A+MFI, and percentage of CD8+HLA-DR-CD38+cells. On multivariate regression, the CD8+HLA-DR+MFI, CD8+CD38+MFI, and total lymphocyte count were associated significantly with myocardial injury. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that lymphopenia, CD8+CD38+MFI, and CD8+HLA-DR+MFI are immune biomarkers of myocardial injury in hypertensive patients with COVID-19. The immune signature described here may aid in understanding the mechanisms underlying myocardial injury in these patients. The study data might open a new window for improvement in the treatment of hypertensive patients with COVID-19 and myocardial injury.

Comparison of benazepril and losartan on endothelial function and vascular stiffness in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of benazepril and losartan on endothelial function and vascular stiffness, in patients with diabetes mellitus and hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included hypertensive diabetic patients with an office systolic blood pressure (BP) ⩾ 130 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ⩾ 80 mmHg. Patients were rolled over to amlodipine for 6 weeks, then we performed C-reactive protein assays, BP measurement and vascular tests; next, patients were randomized to benazepril or losartan. The tests were repeated after 12 weeks. RESULTS: We randomized 14 patients to benazepril and 16 to losartan. There were no differences in systolic (139 versus 134 mmHg, p = 0.618) and diastolic (82 versus 80 mmHg, p = 0.950) BP at the end of the study. C-reactive protein values were lower in the benazepril group (0.38 versus 0.42 mg/dl, p = 0.020). There was a slightly higher flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) response in the benazepril group (45% increase, p = 0.057) than in the losartan group (19% increase, p = 0.132). Both central systolic BP (129 versus 123 mmHg, p = 0.934) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) (8.5 versus 8.5 m/s, p = 0.280) were the same between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertensive diabetic patients using benazepril had a greater reduction in C-reactive protein, and a slight improvement in FMD, than those taking losartan.

Functional vascular study in hypertensive subjects with type 2 diabetes using losartan or amlodipine.

BACKGROUND: Antihypertensive drugs are used to control blood pressure (BP) and reduce macro- and microvascular complications in hypertensive patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to compare the functional vascular changes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine or losartan. METHODS: Patients with a previous diagnosis of hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomly divided into 2 groups and evaluated after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine (5 mg/day) or losartan (100 mg/day). Patient evaluation included BP measurement, ambulatory BP monitoring, and assessment of vascular parameters using applanation tonometry, pulse wave velocity (PWV), and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients were evaluated (21 in each group), with a predominance of women (71%) in both groups. The mean age of the patients in both groups was similar (amlodipine group: 54.9 ± 4.5 years; losartan group: 54.0 ± 6.9 years), with no significant difference in the mean BP [amlodipine group: 145 ± 14 mmHg (systolic) and 84 ± 8 mmHg (diastolic); losartan group: 153 ± 19 mmHg (systolic) and 90 ± 9 mmHg (diastolic)]. The augmentation index (30% ± 9% and 36% ± 8%, p = 0.025) and augmentation pressure (16 ± 6 mmHg and 20 ± 8 mmHg, p = 0.045) were lower in the amlodipine group when compared with the losartan group. PWV and FMD were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with amlodipine exhibited an improved pattern of pulse wave reflection in comparison with those treated with losartan. However, the use of losartan may be associated with independent vascular reactivity to the pressor effect.

Functional Vascular Study in Hypertensive Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Using Losartan or Amlodipine / Estudo Vascular Funcional em Hipertensos com Diabetes Tipo 2 em uso de Losartana ou Anlodipina

Background: Antihypertensive drugs are used to control blood pressure (BP) and reduce macro- and microvascular complications in hypertensive patients with diabetes. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the functional vascular changes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine or losartan. Methods: Patients with a previous diagnosis of hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomly divided into 2 groups and evaluated after 6 weeks of treatment with amlodipine (5 mg/day) or losartan (100 mg/day). Patient evaluation included BP measurement, ambulatory BP monitoring, and assessment of vascular parameters using applanation tonometry, pulse wave velocity (PWV), and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery. Results: A total of 42 patients were evaluated (21 in each group), with a predominance of women (71%) in both groups. The mean age of the patients in both groups was similar (amlodipine group: 54.9 ± 4.5 years; losartan group: 54.0 ± 6.9 years), with no significant difference in the mean BP [amlodipine group: 145 ± 14 mmHg (systolic) and 84 ± 8 mmHg (diastolic); losartan group: 153 ± 19 mmHg (systolic) and 90 ± 9 mmHg (diastolic)]. The augmentation index (30% ± 9% and 36% ± 8%, p = 0.025) and augmentation pressure (16 ± 6 mmHg and 20 ± 8 mmHg, p = 0.045) were lower in the amlodipine group when compared with the losartan group. PWV and FMD were similar in both groups. Conclusions: Hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with amlodipine exhibited an improved pattern of pulse wave reflection in comparison with those treated with losartan. However, the use of losartan may be associated with independent vascular reactivity to the pressor effect. .

Fundamento: A escolha dos fármacos anti-hipertensivos no tratamento de hipertensos diabéticos tem como objetivos o controle da pressão arterial (PA) e a redução das complicações macro/microvasculares. Objetivos: O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar as alterações vasculares funcionais em pacientes hipertensos e diabéticos tipo 2 após seis semanas de anlodipina ou losartana. Métodos: Pacientes com diagnóstico prévio de hipertensão arterial e diabetes melito tipo 2 foram randomizados e divididos em dois grupos, sendo avaliados na sexta semana de uso de losartana 100 mg/dia ou anlodipina 5 mg/dia, com medida da PA, realização de monitoração ambulatorial da pressão arterial e testes para avaliação de parâmetros vasculares, como tonometria de aplanação, velocidade de onda de pulso (VOP) e dilatação mediada por fluxo (DMF) da artéria braquial. Resultados: Foram incluídos 42 pacientes, 21 em cada grupo, com predominância do sexo feminino (71%) nos dois grupos. Os grupos anlodipina e losartana apresentaram média de idade semelhante (54,9 ± 4,5 e 54,0 ± 6,9 anos, respectivamente) e sem diferença estatística na média da PA (145 ± 14/84 ± 8 e 153 ± 19/90 ± 9 mmHg). O augmentation index (30 ± 9% × 36 ± 8%, p = 0,025), assim como a augmentation pressure (16 ± 6 mmHg × 20 ± 8 mmHg, p = 0,045) foram menores no grupo anlodipina que no grupo losartana. Os valores obtidos para VOP e DMF foram semelhantes nos dois grupos. Conclusões: Em hipertensos e diabéticos tipo 2, o uso de anlodipina demonstrou um padrão de reflexão da onda de pulso mais favorável nesse grupo, mas o uso de losartana pode estar associado com ações vasculares independentes do efeito pressórico. .

Tratamento conservador da síndrome de Gradenigo / Conservative treatment of Gradenigo's syndrome

A síndrome de Gradenigo, uma complicaçäo rara de otite média, é caracterizada por otorréia purulenta, paralisia de nervo abducente e dor na área de inervaçäo do nervo trigêmeo. Sua ocorrência está relacionada ao acometimento do ápice da parte petrosa do osso temporal e estruturas vizinhas a essa área. Os autores relatam no artigo o caso de um paciente de 7 anos de idade com esta síndrome e o sucesso na adoçäo da conduta conservadora com antibioticoterapia sem mastoidectomia