The Hypertension Excellence Centre programme of the European Society of Hypertension - current status, activities and reshaping for the future.

PURPOSE: To describe the history of the Excellence Centre (EC) programme of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) since the beginning in 2006, its achievements, and its future developments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We list the number of ECs per country, the research projects performed so far, and the organisational steps needed to reshape the EC programme for the future. RESULTS: In August 2023, the ESH EC programme includes 118 registered ECs in 21 European and 7 non-European countries. Updates about the formal steps for application, re-application, transfer of EC and retirement of EC heads are given. CONCLUSIONS: The EC programme of the ESH has been a success from the beginning. Further refinements will make it fit for the next decades.

Covid-19 associated reduction in hypertension-related diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in Excellence Centers of the European Society of Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic necessitated a decrease in non-Covid-19 related diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in many countries. We explored the impact on tertiary hypertension care. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey regarding 6 key procedures in hypertension care within the Excellence Center network of the European Society of Hypertension. RESULTS: Overall, 54 Excellence Centers from 18 European and 3 non-European countries participated. From 2019 to 2020, there were significant decreases in the median number per centre of ambulatory blood pressure monitorings (ABPM: 544/289 for 2019/2020), duplex ultrasound of renal arteries (Duplex RA: 88.5/55), computed tomographic/magnetic resonance imaging angiography of renal arteries (CT/MRI RA: 66/19.5), percutaneous angioplasties of renal arteries (PTA RA: 5/1), laboratory tests for catecholamines (116/67.5) and for renin/aldosterone (146/83.5) (p < 0.001 for all comparisons, respectively). While reductions in all assessed diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were observed in all annual 3-months periods in the comparisons between 2019 and 2020, the most pronounced reduction occurred between April and June 2020, which was the period of the first wave and the first lockdown in most affected countries. In this period, the median reductions in 2020, as compared to 2019, were 50.7% (ABPM), 47.1% (Duplex RA), 50% (CT/MRI RA), 57.1% (PTA RA), 46.9% (catecholamines) and 41.0% (renin/aldosterone), respectively. Overall differences in reduction between 3-month time intervals were statistically highly significant. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic and therapeutic procedures related to hypertension were dramatically reduced during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic, with the largest reduction during the first lockdown. The long-term consequences regarding blood pressure control and, ultimately, cardiovascular events remain to be investigated.

Treatment of high blood pressure in elderly and octogenarians: European Society of Hypertension statement on blood pressure targets.

The European Society of Hypertension recommend the following main rules for treatment of hypertension in elderly and octogenarians: 1) In elderly hypertensives with SBP ≥ 160 mmHg there is solid evidence to recommend reducing SBP to between 140 mmHg and 150 mmHg. 2) In fit elderly patients less than 80 years old treatment may be considered at SBP ≥ 140 mmHg with a target SBP < 140 mmHg if treatment is well tolerated. 3) In fit individuals older than 80 years with an initial SBP ≥ 160 mmHg it is recommended to reduce SBP to between 150 mmHg and 140 mmHg. 4) In frail elderly patients, it is recommended to base treatment decisions on comorbidity and carefully monitor the effects of treatment. 5) Continuation of well-tolerated antihypertensive treatment should be considered when a treated individual becomes octogenarian. 6) All hypertensive agents are recommended and can be used in the elderly, although diuretics and calcium antagonists may be preferred in isolated systolic hypertension.

Difference in the Prevalence of Elevated Blood Pressure and Hypertension by References in Korean Children and Adolescents.

The prevalence of pediatric hypertension and obesity has increased over the past decades. Pediatric hypertension and obesity are associated with adult hypertension, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disease. There are two main pediatric blood pressure (BP) classification guidelines, the "Clinical Practice Guideline for Screening and Management of High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents" (AAP 2017) and "2016 European Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of high BP in children and adolescents" (ESH 2016). No study has classified Korean youths with cardiometabolic risk. This study analyzed the prevalence of high BP according to AAP 2017 (elevated BP and hypertension) and ESH 2016 (prehypertension and hypertension) in Korean children. Additionally, the cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) were compared between children who were hypertensive in AAP 2017 but normotensive in ESH 2016 (upward reclassified) to those who were normotensive in both AAP 2017 and ESH 2016. Data were extracted from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2016-2018. A total of 1,858 children aged 10-17 years were included in the analysis. The prevalence of elevated BP/prehypertension and hypertension was 4.1 and 6.5% by ESH 2016, and 8.9 and 9.4% by AAP 2017 in Korean youth, respectively. The AAP 2017 reclassified 11.9% of youth in the upper BP class. When those upward reclassified youth were compared to those who were normotensive in both AAP 2017 and ESH 2016, reclassified youth were male predominant (77.1 vs. 49.6%, p < 0.001), older (14.6 vs. 13.8, p < 0.001) and showed higher body mass index (BMI) z-score (0.77 vs. 0.15, p < 0.001) and more overweight/obesity (14.0/30.6 vs. 13.3/6.4%, p < 0.001) and severe CMRFs (triglyceride 83.2 vs. 72.9 mg/dL, p = 0.011; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol 47.3 vs. 51.1 mg/dL, p < 0.001; alanine transaminase 21.7 IU/L vs. 14.7 IU/L, p = 0.001, uric acid 5.89 vs. 5.22 mg/dL, p < 0.001; metabolic syndrome 13.2 vs. 1%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, AAP 2017 showed a higher prevalence of abnormal BP in Korean youth, and those upward reclassified by AAP 2017 were more obese and had severe CMRFs than normotensive Korean children. The AAP 2017 could allow the early detection of Korean youth with more CMRFs.

How should we measure blood pressure? Implications of the fourth blood pressure measurement in office blood pressure.

According to the European Hypertension Guidelines regarding office blood pressure measurements (OBPMs), the mean between second/third or third/fourth OBPM should be taken if the first two readings differ by ≤10 or >10 mmHg, respectively. Our aim was to explore the value of the fourth OBPM and determine whether a simplified OBPM procedure is feasible without loss of quality. In this cross-sectional study, four standard OBPMs were taken. The mean of the second/third OBPM (S2S3/D2D3) and third/fourth OBPM (S3S4/D3D4) for systolic/diastolic values was calculated. Correlation, agreement, and differences regarding BP classification were explored for the entire cohort and subsets with a difference between the first/second OBPM (S1S2/D1D2) ≤10 and >10 mmHg. Overall (n = 802) and for the subsets with an S1S2 (n = 596) and D1D2 (n = 742) difference ≤10 mmHg, S3S4/D3D4 was in median 0.5 mmHg lower than S2S3/D2D3, respectively (p < .0005 for all). In participants with an S1S2 (n = 206) and D1D2 (n = 60) difference >10 mmHg, S3S4/D3D4 differed numerically from S2S3/D2D3, respectively (p > .1 for all). Overall and for all subsets with an S1S2/D1D2 difference ≤10/>10 mmHg, less subjects were numerically classified as hypertensive with S3S4/D3D4 than with S2S3/D2D3 (p > .04), but BP reclassification occurred in both directions in 1.0%-10.0%, depending on the cohort. In conclusion, the third/fourth OBPM results in lower BP values than the second/third measurement, regardless of the difference between first/second OBPM, whereby BP reclassifications occurred in both directions. Therefore, the cutoff of >10 versus ≤10mmHg difference between first/second OBPM to implement a fourth BPM harbors the risk of distorted results. We therefore recommend using the second/third BPM for standardized OBPM. Trial registration: Registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02552030).

American, European and international hypertension guidelines: Time to shake hands?

BACKGROUND: Following evidence-based medicine through guidelines is the first step to successfully treat hypertension and prevent cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: This study compares the recommendations of the most recent American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) blood pressure and International Society of Hypertension (ISH) focusing on prevalent contrasts among guidelines on when, how and in whom start the treatment, which is a major health implications of guidelines. RESULTS: The three guidelines disagree for the cut-off values in the definition of hypertension. Due to the different cut-off values of BP at the definition of hypertension, a patient may be misclassified to one of the four phenotypes of BP from office and out of office measurements, based to which guidelines are followed by the physicians. In addition to this, each society propose different risk score to evaluate the cardiovascular risk in patients with hypertension. CONCLUSION: These differences cause a confusion not only to the general practitioners, but also the hypertension experts about the correct approach. The poor agreement between guidelines and diagnostic tools implies a huge number of patients remained unknown whether they should receive treatment.

A clinical evaluation of blood pressure measurement by iHealth BP5 in pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of blood pressure measurement by the smartphone device iHealth BP5 in pregnant women in a clinical setting, as compared to the Omron M6 Comfort and aneroid manometer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with a gestational age of thirty weeks or more who visited the outpatient clinic for routine visit were eligible for inclusion. For the clinical evaluation we used an adjusted form of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol. We performed six blood pressure measurements per patient, divided over the iHealth BP5, Omron M6 Comfort and aneroid monitor. Statistical analysis consisted of repeated measurement ANOVA and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: We included 45 women. The mean blood pressure differences between all tested devices were less than ±5 mmHg. These differences did not relate to gestational age, BMI or arm circumference. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement of both iHealth BP5 and Omron M6 Comfort, without any systematic effects, as compared to the aneroid manometer. CONCLUSION: The iHealth BP5 is as good as the frequently used Omron M6 Comfort and can be used for blood pressure measurement during pregnancy. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: In 45 women the mean blood pressure differences between the Omron M6 Comfort, iHealth BP5 and the aneroid manometer were less dan ±5 mmHg. These differences did not relate to gestational age, BMI or arm circumference. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement of both iHealth BP5 and Omron M6 Comfort, without any systematic effects, as compared to the aneroid manometer. The iHealth BP5 is as good as the frequently used Omron M6 Comfort and can be used for blood pressure measurement during pregnancy.

Highlights of ESC/ESH 2018 Guidelines on the Management of Hypertension: What Every Doctor Should Know.

This is a review article aiming to make focus on the changes made in the most recent sets of clinical recommendations and indications from European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. In particular, in this article we attempted to focus on the main new elements introduced in order to meet the need of doctors to adhere to guidelines and to provide their patients with the most updated recommendations for the clinical management of hypertension.

Questionable accuracy of home blood pressure measurements in the obese population - Validation of the Microlife WatchBP O3® and Omron RS6® devices according to the European Society of Hypertension-International Protocol.

OBJECTIVE: Two oscillometric devices, the Microlife WatchBP O3® and the Omron RS6®, designed for self-blood pressure measurement were evaluated according to the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)-International Protocol (IP) Revision 2010 in the obese population. METHODS: The Microlife WatchBP O3 measures blood pressure (BP) at the brachial level and the Omron RS6 measures BP at the wrist level. The ESH-IP revision 2010 includes a total of 33 subjects. The difference between observers' and device BP values was calculated for each measure. A total of 99 pairs of BP differences were classified into three categories (≤5, ≤10, and ≤15 mmHg). The protocol procedures were followed precisely in each of the two studies. RESULTS: Microlife WatchBP O3 and Omron RS6 failed to fulfill the criteria of the ESH-IP. The mean differences between the device and the mercury readings were: 0.3±7.8 mmHg and -1.9±6.4 mmHg for systolic BP and diastolic BP, respectively, for Microlife WatchBP O3, and 2.7±9.9 mmHg for SBP and 3.5±11.1 mmHg for diastolic BP for Omron RS6. CONCLUSION: Microlife WatchBP O3 and Omron RS6 readings differing from the mercury standard by more than 5, 10, and 15 mmHg failed to fulfill the ESH-IP revision 2010 requirements in obese subjects. Therefore, the two devices cannot be recommended for use in obese subjects.

Validation of four devices: Omron M6 Comfort, Omron HEM-7420, Withings BP-800, and Polygreen KP-7670 for home blood pressure measurement according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Four oscillometric devices, including the Omron M6 Comfort, Omron HEM-7420, Withings BP-800, and Polygreen KP-7670, designed for self-blood pressure measurement (SBPM) were evaluated according to the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) International Protocol Revision 2010 in four separate studies. METHODS: The four devices measure brachial blood pressure (BP) using the oscillometric method. The Withings BP-800 has to be connected to an Apple® iOS device such as an iPhone®, iPad®, or iPod®. The ESH International Protocol Revision 2010 includes a total number of 33 subjects. The difference between observer and device BP values was calculated for each measure. Ninety-nine pairs of BP differences were classified into three categories (≤5 mmHg, ≤10 mmHg, ≤15 mmHg). The protocol procedures were followed precisely in each of the four studies. RESULTS: All four tested devices passed the validation process. The mean differences between the device and mercury readings were: -1.8±5.1 mmHg and -0.4±2.8 mmHg for systolic and diastolic BP, respectively, using the Omron M6 Comfort device; 2.5±4.6 mmHg and -1.2±4.3 mmHg for the Omron HEM-7420 device; -0.2±5.0 mmHg and 0.4±4.2 mmHg for the Withings BP-800 device; and 3.0±5.3 mmHg and 0.3±5.2 mmHg for the Polygreen KP-7670 device. CONCLUSION: Omron M6 Comfort, Omron HEM-7420, Withings BP-800, and Polygreen KP-7670 readings differing by less than 5 mmHg, 10 mmHg, and 15 mmHg fulfill the ESH International Protocol Revision 2010 requirements, and therefore are suitable for use by patients for SBPM, if used correctly.

Validation of Omron RS8, RS6, and RS3 home blood pressure monitoring devices, in accordance with the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol revision 2010.

BACKGROUND: Allowing patients to measure their blood pressure at home is recognized as being of clinical value. However, it is not known how often these measurements are taken correctly. Blood pressure monitors for home use fall into two types based on the position of the cuff, ie, at the upper arm or the wrist. The latter is particularly convenient, as measurements can be taken fully clothed. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the wrist-type blood pressure monitors Omron RS8 (HEM-6310F-E), Omron RS6 (HEM-6221-E), and Omron RS3 (HEM-6130-E). METHODS: A team of three trained doctors validated the performance of these devices by comparing the measurements obtained from these devices with those taken using a standard mercury sphygmomanometer. All the devices met the validation requirements of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol revision 2010. RESULTS: The difference in blood pressure readings between the tested device and the standard mercury sphygmomanometer was within 3 mmHg, which is acceptable according to the European Society of Hypertension guidelines. CONCLUSION: All the home devices tested were found to be suitable for measuring blood pressure at home because their performance fulfilled the requirement of the guidelines.

Renal denervation in moderate treatment-resistant hypertension.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the effect of renal denervation (RDN) in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension according to the established definition (Joint National Committee VII and European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology guidelines), that is, office blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90 mm Hg (with at least three antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic, in adequate doses) and confirmed by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). BACKGROUND: RDN emerged as an innovative interventional antihypertensive therapy. However, so far, only patients with severe hypertension (systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg or ≥150 mm Hg for patients with type 2 diabetes) have been investigated. METHODS: In this study, there were 54 patients with moderate treatment-resistant hypertension (office BP ≥140/90 mm Hg and <160/100 mm Hg and diagnosis confirmed by 24-h ABPM of ≥130/80 mm Hg) who underwent catheter-based RDN using the Symplicity catheter (Medtronic Inc., Mountain View, California). RESULTS: Patients were treated with 5.1 ± 1.4 antihypertensive drugs on average. Office BP was significantly reduced by 13/7 mm Hg 6 months after RDN (systolic: 151 ± 6 mm Hg vs. 138 ± 21 mm Hg, p < 0.001; diastolic: 83 ± 11 mm Hg vs. 75 ± 11 mm Hg, p < 0.001). In patients (n = 36) who underwent ABPM 6 months after treatment, there was a reduction in average 24-h ABPM by 14/7 mm Hg (systolic: 150 ± 16 mm Hg vs. 136 ± 16 mm Hg, p < 0.001; diastolic: 83 ± 10 mm Hg vs. 76 ± 10 mm Hg, p < 0.001). In 51% of patients, office BP was controlled below 140/90 mm Hg after RDN. In addition, heart rate decreased from 67 ± 11 to 63 ± 10 beats/min (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that RDN may reduce office and 24-h ambulatory BP substantially in patients with moderate treatment-resistant hypertension. (Renal Denervation in Treatment Resistant Hypertension; NCT01687725).

Validation of four automatic devices for self-measurement of blood pressure according to the international protocol of the European Society of Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Four oscillometric devices for self-measurement of blood pressure (SBPM) were evaluated according to the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) international protocol and its 2010 revision in four separate studies. The Omron® M2, Omron M3, and Omron M6 measure blood pressure (BP) at the brachial level, while the Omron R2 measures BP at the wrist level. METHODS: The international protocol requires a total number of 33 subjects in which the validation is performed. The Omron M2 and Omron R2 were validated in 2009 according to the ESH international protocol, while the Omron M3 and Omron M6 were validated in 2010-2011 according to the 2010 ESH international protocol revision. The protocol procedures were followed precisely. RESULTS: All four tested devices passed the validation process. The mean differences between the device and mercury readings were 2.7 ± 5.0 and -1.4 ± 3.2 mmHg for systolic and diastolic BP, respectively, using the Omron M2 device, and 1.7 ± 3.2 and -0.9 ± 2.6 mmHg using the Omron M3, 1.6 ± 2.9 and -0.9 ± 2.5 mmHg using the Omron M6, and -1.1 ± 4.8 and -0.9 ± 4.3 mmHg using the Omron R2. CONCLUSION: Readings from the Omron M2, Omron M3, Omron M6, and Omron R2, differing by less than 5, 10, and 15 mmHg, fulfill the ESH international protocol and its 2010 revision requirements. Therefore, each of these four devices can be used by patients for SBPM.