Adverse cardiac remodeling is absent in patients with true controlled resistant hypertension.

Resistant hypertension (RHTN), defined as blood pressure (BP) that is uncontrolled with ≥3 medications, including a long-acting thiazide diuretic, also includes a subset with BP that is controlled with ≥4 medications, so-called controlled RHTN. This resistance is attributed to intravascular volume excess. Patients with RHTN overall have a higher prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and diastolic dysfunction compared to patients with non-RHTN. We tested the hypothesis that patients with controlled RHTN due to the intravascular volume excess have higher left ventricular mass index (LVMI), higher prevalence of LVH, larger intracardiac volumes, and more diastolic dysfunction compared to patients with controlled non-resistant hypertension (CHTN), defined as BP controlled with ≤3 anti-hypertensive medications. Patients with controlled RHTN (n = 69) or CHTN (n = 63) who were treated at the University of Alabama at Birmingham were offered enrollment and underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Diastolic function was assessed by peak filling rate, time needed in diastole to recover 80% of stroke volume, E:A ratios and left atrial volume. LVMI was higher in patients with controlled RHTN (64.4 ± 22.5 vs 56.9 ± 11.5; P = .017). Intracardiac volumes were similar in both groups. Diastolic function parameters were not significantly different between groups. There were no significant differences in age, gender, race, body mass index, dyslipidemia between the two groups. The findings show that patients with controlled RHTN have higher LVMI, but comparable diastolic function to those of patients with CHTN.

Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension Is Accompanied by Increased Out-of-Clinic Aldosterone Secretion.

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) in treated patients is defined as controlled office blood pressure (BP) but uncontrolled out-of-clinic ambulatory BP. Previously, we have shown that patients with MUCH have evidence of heightened out-of-clinic sympathetic nervous system activity. The aim is to test the hypothesis that MUCH patients have higher aldosterone secretion compared with patients with true controlled hypertension. Two hundred twenty-two patients were recruited after having controlled office BP readings at ≥3 clinic visits. Patients taking MR (mineralocorticoid receptor) antagonists and epithelial sodium channel blockers were excluded. All patients were evaluated by clinic automated office BP and morning serum aldosterone and plasma renin activity. Out-of-clinic ambulatory BP monitoring and 24-hour urinary aldosterone, catecholamines, and metanephrines were also measured. Sixty-four patients had MUCH, and the remaining 48 patients had true controlled hypertension. MUCH patients had significantly higher out-of-clinic levels of 24-hour urinary aldosterone, catecholamines, and metanephrines compared with true controlled hypertension. The 2 groups did not differ in serum aldosterone, plasma renin activity, or aldosterone-renin ratio collected in clinic. In addition, 32.8% of MUCH patients had high out-of-clinic 24-hour urinary aldosterone (≥12 µg) but normal clinic serum aldosterone (<15 ng/dL) and aldosterone-renin ratio (<20). Further, in correlation matrix analysis, higher 24-hour urinary catecholamines and metanephrines were associated with higher 24-hour urinary aldosterone and plasma renin activity levels in MUCH patients. Patients with MUCH have higher out-of-clinic urinary aldosterone levels compared with patients with true controlled hypertension. This study suggests that patients with MUCH likely have higher out-of-clinic sympathetic nervous system tone increases aldosterone secretion mediated by increased renin release that may contribute to their higher out-of-clinic BP.

Reserpine Substantially Lowers Blood Pressure in Patients With Refractory Hypertension: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: Refractory hypertension (RfHTN), a phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure, is defined as uncontrolled automated office blood pressure (AOBP) ≥130/80 mm Hg and awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) ≥130/80 mm Hg on ≥5 antihypertensive medications, including chlorthalidone and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. Previous studies suggest that RfHTN is attributable to heightened sympathetic tone. The current study tested whether reserpine, a potent sympatholytic agent, lowers blood pressure (BP) in patients with RfHTN. METHODS: Twenty-one out of 45 consecutive patients with suspected RfHTN were determined to be fully adherent with their antihypertensive regimen. Seven patients agreed to participate in the current clinical trial with reserpine and 6 patients completed the study. Other sympatholytic medications, such as clonidine or guanfacine, were tapered and discontinued before starting reserpine. Reserpine 0.1 mg daily was administered in an open-label fashion for 4 weeks. All patients were evaluated by AOBP and 24-hour ABP at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Reserpine lowered mean systolic and diastolic AOBP by 29.3 ± 22.2 and 22.0 ± 15.8 mm Hg, respectively. Mean 24-hour systolic and diastolic ABPs were reduced by 21.8 ± 13.4 and 15.3 ± 9.6 mm Hg, mean awake systolic and diastolic ABPs by 23.8 ± 11.8 and 17.8 ± 9.2 mm Hg, and mean asleep systolic and diastolic ABPs by 21.5 ± 11.4 and 13.7 ± 6.4 mm Hg, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Reserpine, a potent sympatholytic agent, lowers BP in patients whose BP remained uncontrolled on maximal antihypertensive therapy, lending support to the hypothesis that excess sympathetic output contributes importantly to the development of RfHTN.

Aortic blood pressure and arterial stiffness in patients with controlled resistant and non-resistant hypertension.

The purpose of the current study was to determine whether aortic blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness are greater in patients with controlled resistant hypertension (RHTN) than controlled non-resistant hypertension (non-RHTN) despite similar clinic BP level. Participants were recruited from University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Hypertension Clinic. Controlled hypertension was defined as automated office BP measurement with BP < 135/85 mm Hg. A total of 141 participants were evaluated by pulse wave analysis (PWA) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV). Among them, 75 patients had controlled RHTN with use of 4 or more antihypertensive medications and 56 patients had controlled non-RHTN with use of 3 or less antihypertensive medications. Compared to patients with controlled non-RHTN, those with controlled RHTN were more likely to be African American and had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus and congestive heart failure. The mean number of antihypertensive medications was greater in patients with controlled RHTN (4.4 ± 0.8 vs 2.3 ± 0.7, P < .001). Clinic brachial BP, aortic BP, augmentation pressure (AP), augmentation index normalized for heart rate of 75 beats per minute (AIx@75) and cf-PWV were similar in both groups. In summary, there was no significant difference in central BP or arterial stiffness between patients with controlled RHTN and controlled non-RHTN. These findings suggest that the higher residual cardiovascular risk observed in patients with RHTN after achieving BP control compared to patients with more easily controlled hypertension is not likely attributable to persistent differences in central BP and arterial stiffness.

Antihypertensive Medication Adherence and Confirmation of True Refractory Hypertension.

Refractory hypertension (RfHTN) is a phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure defined as uncontrolled BP despite the use of effective doses of ≥5 antihypertensive medications including a long-acting thiazide-like diuretic (chlorthalidone) and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The degree of medication nonadherence is unknown among patients with RfHTN. In this prospective evaluation, 54 patients with apparent RfHTN were recruited from the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hypertension Clinic after having uncontrolled BP at 3 or more clinic visits. All patients' BP was evaluated by automated office BP and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (n=49). Antihypertensive medication adherence was determined by measuring 24-hour urine specimens for antihypertensive medications and their metabolites by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (n=45). Of the 45 patients who completed 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring, 40 (88.9%) had confirmed RfHTN based on an elevated automated office BP (≥130/80 mm Hg), mean 24-hour ABP (≥125/75 mm Hg), and mean awake (day-time) ABP (≥130/80 mm Hg). Out of the 40 fully evaluated patients with RfHTN, 16 (40.0%) were fully adherent with all prescribed medications. Eighteen (45.0%) patients were partially adherent and 6 (15.0%) had none of the prescribed agents detected in their urine. Of 18 patients who were partially adherent, 5 (12.5%) were adherent with at least 5 medications, including chlorthalidone and the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, consistent with true RfHTN. Of patients identified as having apparent RfHTN, 52.5% were adherent with at least 5 antihypertensive medications, including chlorthalidone and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, confirming true RfTHN. These findings validate RfHTN as a rare, but true phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure.

Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension Is Not Attributable to Medication Nonadherence.

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) in treated hypertensive patients is defined as controlled automated office blood pressure (BP; <135/85 mm Hg) in-clinic but uncontrolled out-of-clinic BP by ambulatory BP monitoring (awake [daytime] readings ≥135/85 mm Hg or 24-hour readings ≥130/80 mm Hg). To determine whether MUCH is attributable to antihypertensive medication nonadherence. One hundred eighty-four enrolled patients were confirmed to have controlled office BP; of these, 167 patients were with adequate 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings. Of 167 patients, 86 were controlled by in-clinic BP assessment but had uncontrolled ambulatory awake BP, indicative of MUCH. The remaining 81 had controlled in-clinic and ambulatory awake BP, consistent with true controlled hypertension. After exclusion of 9 patients with missing 24-hour urine collections, antihypertensive medication adherence was determined based on the detection of urinary drugs or drug metabolites by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Of the 81 patients with MUCH, 69 (85.2%) were fully adherent and 12 (14.8%) were partially adherent (fewer medications detected than prescribed). Of the 77 patients with true controlled hypertension, 69 (89.6%) were fully adherent with prescribed antihypertensive medications and 8 (10.4%) were partially adherent. None of the patients in either group were fully nonadherent. There was no statistically significant difference in complete or partial adherence between the MUCH and true controlled groups (P=0.403). Measurement of urinary drug and drug metabolite levels demonstrates a similarly high level of antihypertensive medication adherence in both MUCH and truly controlled hypertensive patients. These findings indicate that MUCH is not attributable to antihypertensive medication nonadherence.

Out-of-Clinic Sympathetic Activity Is Increased in Patients With Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension.

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) is defined as controlled automated office blood pressure (BP; AOBP <135/85 mm Hg) in-clinic in patients receiving antihypertensive medication(s) but uncontrolled BP out-of-clinic by 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM; awake ≥135/85 mm Hg). We hypothesized that MUCH patients have greater out-of-clinic sympathetic activity compared with true controlled hypertensives. Patients being treated for hypertension were prospectively recruited after 3 or more consecutive clinic visits. All patients were evaluated by in-clinic automated office BP, plasma catecholamines, and spot-urine/plasma metanephrines. In addition, out-of-clinic 24-hour ABPM, 24-hour urinary for catecholamines and metanephrines was done. Out of 237 patients recruited, 169 patients had controlled in-clinic BP of which 156 patients had completed ABPM. Seventy-four were true controlled hypertensives, that is controlled by clinic automated office BP and by out-of-clinic ABPM. The remaining 82 were controlled by clinic automated office BP, but uncontrolled during out-of-clinic ABPM, indicative of MUCH. After exclusion of 4 patients because of inadequate or lack of 24-hour urinary collections, 72 true controlled hypertensive and 80 MUCH patients were analyzed. MUCH patients had significantly higher out-of-clinic BP variability and lower heart rate variability compared with true controlled hypertensives, as well as higher levels of out-of-clinic urinary catecholamines and metanephrines levels consistent with higher out-of-clinic sympathetic activity. In contrast, there was no difference in in-clinic plasma catecholamines and spot-urine/plasma levels of metanephrines between the 2 groups, consistent with similar levels of sympathetic activity while in clinic. MUCH patients have evidence of heightened out-of-clinic sympathetic activity compared with true controlled hypertensives, which may contribute to the development of MUCH.

Refractory Hypertension Is not Attributable to Intravascular Fluid Retention as Determined by Intracardiac Volumes.

Refractory hypertension (RfHTN) is an extreme phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure defined as lack of blood pressure control with ≥5 medications, including a long-acting thiazide and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. RfHTN is a subgroup of resistant hypertension (RHTN), which is defined as blood pressure >135/85 mm Hg with ≥3 antihypertensive medications, including a diuretic. RHTN is generally attributed to persistent intravascular fluid retention. It is unknown whether alternative mechanisms are operative in RfHTN. Our objective was to determine whether RfHTN is characterized by persistent fluid retention, indexed by greater intracardiac volumes determined by cardiac magnetic resonance when compared with controlled RHTN patients. Consecutive patients evaluated in our institution with RfHTN and controlled RHTN were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria included advanced chronic kidney disease and masked or white coat hypertension. All enrolled patients underwent biochemical testing and cardiac magnetic resonance. The RfHTN group (n=24) was younger (mean age, 51.7±8.9 versus 60.6±11.5 years; P=0.003) and had a greater proportion of women (75.0% versus 43%; P=0.02) compared with the controlled RHTN group (n=30). RfHTN patients had a greater left ventricular mass index (88.3±35.0 versus 54.6±12.5 g/m2; P<0.001), posterior wall thickness (10.1±3.1 versus 7.7±1.5 mm; P=0.001), and septal wall thickness (14.5±3.8 versus 10.0±2.2 mm; P<0.001). There was no difference in B-type natriuretic peptide levels and left atrial or ventricular volumes. Diastolic dysfunction was noted in RfHTN. Our findings demonstrate greater left ventricular hypertrophy without chamber enlargement in RfHTN, suggesting that antihypertensive treatment failure is not attributable to intravascular volume retention.

White-Coat Effect Is Uncommon in Patients With Refractory Hypertension.

Refractory hypertension is a recently described phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure defined as uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) despite the use of ≥5 different antihypertensive agents, including chlorthalidone and spironolactone. Recent studies indicate that refractory hypertension is uncommon, with a prevalence of ≈5% to 10% of patients referred to a hypertension specialty clinic for uncontrolled hypertension. The prevalence of white-coat effect, that is, uncontrolled automated office BP ≥135/85 mm Hg and controlled out-of-office BP <135/85 mm Hg, by awake ambulatory BP monitor in hypertensive patients overall is ≈30% to 40%. The prevalence of white-coat effect among patients with refractory hypertension has not been previously reported. In this prospective evaluation, consecutive patients referred to the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hypertension Clinic for uncontrolled hypertension were enrolled. Refractory hypertension was defined as uncontrolled automated office BP ≥135/85 mm Hg with the use of ≥5 antihypertensive agents, including chlorthalidone and spironolactone. Automated office BP measurements were based on 6 serial readings, done automatically with the use of a BpTRU device unobserved in the clinic. Out-of-office BP measurements were done by 24-hour ambulatory BP monitor. Thirty-four patients were diagnosed with refractory hypertension, of whom 31 had adequate ambulatory BP monitor readings. White-coat effect was present in only 2 patients, or 6.5% of the 31 patients with refractory hypertension, suggesting that white-coat effect is largely absent in patients with refractory hypertension. These findings suggest that white-coat effect is not a common cause of apparent lack of BP control in patients failing maximal antihypertensive treatment.

Pathophysiology and treatment of resistant hypertension: the role of aldosterone and amiloride-sensitive sodium channels.

Resistant hypertension is a clinically distinct subgroup of hypertension defined by the failure to achieve blood pressure control on optimal dosing of at least 3 antihypertensive medications of different classes, including a diuretic. The pathophysiology of hypertension can be attributed to aldosterone excess in more than 20% of patients with resistant hypertension. Existing dogma attributes the increase in blood pressure seen with increases in aldosterone to its antinatriuretic effects in the distal nephron. However, emerging research, which has identified and has begun to define the function of amiloride-sensitive sodium channels and mineralocorticoid receptors in the systemic vasculature, challenges impaired natriuresis as the sole cause of aldosterone-mediated resistant hypertension. This review integrates these findings to better define the role of the vasculature and aldosterone in the pathophysiology of resistant hypertension. In addition, a brief guide to the treatment of resistant hypertension is presented.

Novel strategies for treatment of resistant hypertension.

Resistant hypertension, defined as blood pressure (BP) remaining above goal despite the use of 3 or more antihypertensive medications at maximally tolerated doses (one ideally being a diuretic) or BP that requires 4 or more agents to achieve control, occurs in a substantial proportion (>10%) of treated hypertensive patients. Refractory hypertension is a recently described subset of resistant hypertension that cannot be controlled with maximal medical therapy (⩾5 antihypertensive medications of different classes at maximal tolerated doses). Patients with resistant or refractory hypertension are at increased cardiovascular risk and comprise the target population for novel antihypertensive treatments. Device-based interventions, including carotid baroreceptor activation and renal denervation, reduce sympathetic nervous system activity and have effectively reduced BP in early clinical trials of resistant hypertension. Renal denervation interrupts afferent and efferent renal nerve signaling by delivering radiofrequency energy, other forms of energy, or norepinephrine-depleting pharmaceuticals through catheters in the renal arteries. Renal denervation has the advantage of not requiring general anesthesia, surgical intervention, or device implantation and has been evaluated extensively in observational proof-of-principle studies and larger randomized controlled trials. It has been shown to be safe and effective in reducing clinic BP, indices of sympathetic nervous system activity, and a variety of hypertension-related comorbidities. These include impaired glucose metabolism/insulin resistance, end-stage renal disease, obstructive sleep apnea, cardiac hypertrophy, heart failure, and cardiac arrhythmias. This article reviews the strengths, limitations, and future applications of novel device-based treatment, particularly renal denervation, for resistant hypertension and its comorbidities.