Influence of multiple risk factor control level on cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVE: The relationship between the level of baseline risk factor control and cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients with blood pressure intervention is not well understood. It is also unclear whether the level of baseline risk factor control is persuasively associated with cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients with blood pressure lowering strategy. METHOD: We performed an analysis of the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial. Participants without complete baseline risk factor data were excluded. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and estimate association between risk factor control levels (≥6, 5, 4, and ≤ 3) and cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 8337 participants were involved in the analysis and the median follow-up period was 3.19 years. Each additional risk factor uncontrolled was associated with a 24% higher cardiovascular risk (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.37). Compared with participants with optimal risk factor control, those with ≤ 3 factors control exhibited 95% higher cardiovascular risk (HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.37-2.77). The corresponding protective effects of multiple risk factor modification were not influenced by intensive or standard antihypertensive treatment (P for interaction = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: A stepwise association was observed between cardiovascular risk and the number of risk factor control in hypertensive patients. The more risk factor was modified, the less cardiovascular risk was observed, irrespective of different blood pressure lowering strategies. Comprehensive risk factor control strategies are warranted to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in hypertensive patients. Trial registration STEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03015311. Registered 2 January 2017.

Electrocardiographic tracking of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertension: incidence and prognostic outcomes from the SPRINT trial.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the impact of intensive blood pressure (BP) control on left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) incidence and evaluates the prognostic implications of LVH status (pre-existing/new-onset/persistent/regression) using Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) Electrocardiogram Data. METHODS: Poisson regression was used to assess new-onset LVH and LVH regression rates. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard models determined the risk of adverse cardiovascular events (ACE), a composite of myocardial infarction (MI), non-MI acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death, alongside safety adverse events. RESULTS: In 8,016 participants, intensive BP control significantly reduced new-onset LVH (8.27 vs. 14.79 per 1000-person years; adjusted p<0.001) and increased LVH regression (14.89 vs. 11.89 per 1000-person years; adjusted p<0.001). Elevated ACE risk was notable in participants with pre-existing LVH [adjusted HR: 1.94 (95% CI: 1.25-2.99); p = 0.003], new-onset LVH [adjusted 1.74 (95% CI: 1.16-2.60); p = 0.007], and persistent LVH[adjusted HR: 1.96 (95% CI: 1.11-3.46); p = 0.020], compared to those without LVH. Intriguingly, LVH regression attenuated this risk increment [adjusted HR: 1.57 (95% CI: 0.98-2.53); p = 0.062]. Achieving a BP target of < 120/80 mmHg nullified the increased ACE risk in those with pre-existing LVH. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive BP control is instrumental in both reducing the emergence of LVH and fostering its regression. Pre-existing, new-onset LVH and persistent LV remain a predictor of adverse cardiovascular prognosis, whereas LVH regression and achieving on-treatment BP < 120/80 mmHg in pre-existing LVH individuals may further mitigate residual cardiovascular risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: ClinicalTrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT01206062.

Impact of baseline cardiovascular risk on the outcomes of intensive blood pressure intervention: a post hoc analysis of the China rural hypertension control project.

BACKGROUND: The 2018/2023 ESC/ESH Guidelines underlined a gap how baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk predicted blood pressure (BP) lowering benefits. Further, 2017 ACC/AHA Guideline and 2021 WHO Guideline recommended implementation studies about intensive BP control. Now, to bridge these guideline gaps, we conducted a post hoc analysis to validate whether the baseline CVD risk influences the effectiveness of the intensive BP control strategy, which was designed by China Rural Hypertension Control Project (CRHCP). METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of CRHCP, among which participants were enrolled except those having CVD history, over 80 years old, or missing data. Subjects were stratified into quartiles by baseline estimated CVD risk and then grouped into intervention and usual care group according to original assignment in CRHCP. Participants in the intervention group received an integrated, multi-faceted treatment strategy, executed by trained non-physician community health-care providers, aiming to achieve a BP target of < 130/80 mmHg. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratios of outcomes for intervention in each quartile, while interaction effect between intervention and estimated CVD risk quartiles was additionally assessed. The primary outcome comprised myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or CVD deaths. RESULTS: Significant lower rates of primary outcomes for intervention group compared with usual care for each estimated CVD risk quartile were reported. The hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) in the four quartiles (from Q1 to Q4) were 0.59 (0.40, 0.87), 0.54 (0.40, 0.72), 0.72 (0.57, 0.91) and 0.65 (0.53, 0.80), respectively (all Ps < 0.01). There's no significant difference of hazard ratios by intervention across risk quartiles (P for interaction = 0.370). Only the relative risk of hypotension, not symptomatic hypotension, was elevated in the intervention group among upper three quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive BP lowering strategy designed by CRHCP group was effective and safe in preventing cardiovascular events independent of baseline CVD risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03527719.

Efficacy and Safety of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering After Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to comprehensively examine the available data on the efficacy and safety of intensive blood pressure lowering (IBPL) compared to standard blood pressure control (SBPC) in patients with acute ischemic stroke following reperfusion therapy. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted using 4 databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science to collect relevant articles from inception to December 2023. The endpoints were the condition of the patient measured by the modified Rankin scale (mRS, range value from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 90 days, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, death within 90 days, recurrent ischemic stroke, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS: Seven eligible studies involving 4499 participants (2218 patients in IBPL group and 2281 patients in SBPC group) were included in the analysis. Both groups demonstrated similar baseline characteristics. Within the endovascular therapy (EVT) subgroup, the IBPL group exhibited worse mRS than in SBPC group. After EVT, different IBPL targets showed worse outcomes in the mRS for the SBP <140 mmHg and SBP <120 mmHg subgroups, with no difference between IBPL and SBPC groups in the SBP <130 mmHg subgroup. In the intravenous thrombolysis subgroup, although the IBPL group exhibited less ICH, the long-term functional outcomes were not improved significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The IBPL group exhibited a less favorable functional outcome after EVT. Moreover, no worse functional outcomes were noticed in the SBP <130 mmHg subgroup after EVT. However, the functional outcome was similar after intravenous thrombolysis.

Influence of Baseline Diastolic Blood Pressure on the Effects of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering: Results From the STEP Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The STEP (Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients) trial demonstrated that intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) lowering has cardiovascular benefits. However, the influence of baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) on the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular outcomes has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the STEP trial. Participants were randomly allocated to intensive (110 to <130 mm Hg) or standard (130 to <150 mm Hg) treatment groups. The effects of intensive SBP lowering on the primary composite outcome (stroke, acute coronary syndrome, acute decompensated heart failure, coronary revascularization, atrial fibrillation, and cardiovascular death), major adverse cardiac event (a composite of the individual components of the primary outcome except for stroke), and all-cause mortality were analyzed according to baseline DBP as both a categorical and a continuous variable. RESULTS: The 8259 participants had a mean age of 66.2±4.8 years, and 46.5% were men. Participants with lower DBP were slightly older and had greater histories of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia. Within each baseline DBP quartile, the mean achieved DBP was lower in the intensive versus standard group. The effects of intensive SBP lowering were not modified by baseline DBP as a continuous variable or as a categorical variable (quartiles, or <70, 70 to <80, and ≥80 mm Hg; all P value for interaction >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effects of intensive SBP lowering on cardiovascular outcomes were unaffected by baseline DBP. Lower DBP should not be an obstacle to intensive SBP control. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03015311.

Effect of intensive blood pressure lowering on left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with hypertension: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Successful antihypertensive management can limit left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and improve the clinical prognosis. However, it remains unclear whether intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering has a greater effect on the occurrence and regression of LVH compared to standard BP lowering. METHODS: We searched the electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to 2 June 2023. Relevant and eligible studies were included. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULT: Four RCTs including 20,747 patients met our inclusion criteria. The results demonstrated that intensive BP lowering was associated with a significantly lower rate of LVH (OR 0.85; 95%CI: 0.78-0.93; I2 48.6%) in patients with hypertension compared to standard BP lowering. Subgroup analysis revealed that the effect of intensive BP lowering on LVH was more pronounced in patients with high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors (OR 0.82; 95%CI: 0.72-0.93; I2 57.9%). In addition, intensive BP lowering led to significant regression of LVH (OR 0.68; 95%CI: 0.52-0.88; I2 45.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that intensive BP lowering should be instigated as soon as possible for optimal control of BP and to prevent regression of LVH, especially in patients with high risk of CVD. However, caution is warranted when treating hypertensive patients with LVH to systolic blood pressure (SBP) targets below 130 mm Hg.

We conducted a meta-analysis of four randomised controlled trials involving 20,747 patients with hypertension. The result suggested that intensive BP lowering should be instigated as soon as possible for optimal control of BP and to prevent regression of LVH, especially in patients with high risk of CVD. However, caution is warranted when treating hypertensive patients with LVH to SBP targets below 130 mm Hg.

Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Hypertension in the Elderly.

There is a high prevalence of systemic arterial hypertension in the elderly; 70% of adults >65 years have this disease. A key mechanism in the development of hypertension in the elderly is increased arterial stiffness. This accounts for the increase in systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure and fall in diastolic blood pressure (isolated systolic hypertension) that are commonly seen in the elderly, compared with younger persons. The diagnosis of hypertension is made on the basis of in-office blood pressure measurements together with ambulatory and home blood pressure recordings. Lifestyle changes are the cornerstone of management of hypertension. Comprehensive guidelines regarding blood pressure threshold at which to start pharmacotherapy as well as target blood pressure levels have been issued by both European and American professional bodies. In recent years, there has been considerable interest in intensive lowering of blood pressure in older patients with hypertension. Several large, randomized controlled trials have suggested that a strategy of aiming for a target systolic blood pressure of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) rather than a target of <140 mm Hg (standard treatment) results in significant reduction in the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and total mortality. A systolic blood pressure treatment of <130 mm Hg should be considered favorably in non-institutionalized, ambulatory, free living older patients. In contrast, in the older patient with a high burden of comorbidities and limited life expectancy, an individualized team-based approach, based on clinical judgment and patient preference should be adopted. An increasing body of evidence for older adults with hypertension suggests that intensive blood pressure lowering may prevent or at least partially prevent cognitive decline.

Presence and severity of coronary artery disease in patients who achieved intensive blood pressure reduction at the time of coronary computed tomography angiography.

Blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment should be aimed at achieving intensive BP control. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has become more widely available and enables the accurate noninvasive assessment of coronary artery stenosis for screening. The presence and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients who achieved intensive BP control at the time of CCTA were compared to those in patients without hypertension (HTN). Nine hundred eighty-five consecutive subjects who were clinically suspected of having CAD or who had at least one cardiac risk factor underwent CCTA. The patients were divided into four groups: patients without HTN (non-HTN group), hypertensive patients who underwent intensive BP lowering (intensive group, <130/80 mmHg), patients who underwent standard BP lowering (standard group, 130-139/80-89 mmHg) and patients with uncontrolled BP (uncontrolled group, >140/90 mmHg). Interestingly, %CAD in the Intensive group was significantly higher than that in patients without HTN. The Intensive group was older and had a higher body mass index, more significantly stenosed coronary vessels, lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the blood, and higher rates of dyslipidemia, diabetes, and anti-dyslipidemia and anti-diabetic medication use than the non-HTN group. The presence of CAD in the Intensive group was independently associated with age, male and smoking, whereas the presence of CAD in the non-HTN group was associated with age, male and family history. Finally, predictors of the number of VDs in the non-HTN and intensive BP-lowering groups were age, male, DL, and intensive BP lowering. In conclusion, these results suggest that hypertensive patients need more rigorous management of other coronary risk factors, despite receiving intensive BP-lowering treatment.

Intensive blood pressure lowering: a practical review.

According to the last Hypertension guideline recommendations, it may be concluded that intensive BP lowering is only advisable in a subgroup of patients where there is a clear net benefit of targeting to lower BP goals. However, taking into account the relevance of correct BP measurement, estimates of the benefits versus the harm should be based on reliable office BP measurements and home BP measurements.There is still debate about which BP goals are optimal in reducing morbidity and mortality in uncomplicated hypertensives and in those with associated comorbidities. In recent years, trials and meta-analyses have assessed intensive BP lowering, with some success. However, a careful examination of the results shows that current data are not easily applicable to the general hypertensive population.This article reviews the evidence on and controversies about intensive BP lowering in general and in specific clinical situations, and the importance of obtaining reliable BP readings in patients with hypertension and comorbidities.

Lowering the systolic blood pressure target in hypertensive patients: current controversies and future outlook.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have established the benefits of blood pressure (BP) lowering. The 2017 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) guidelines for the management of hypertension established 130/80 mmHg as the threshold for the diagnosis- and treatment-target BP level. Area covered: The global trends are thought to be heading toward intensive BP-lowering management. In this paper, authors summarize the evidence on lowering the BP target in hypertensive patients with a focus on the 2017 AHA/ACC guidelines. Expert commentary: According to the results of clinical research, meta-analyses and the 2017 AHA/ACC guidelines, the target systolic BP may change from less than 140/80 mmHg to 130/80 mmHg in any other international hypertension guidelines. However, this direction of intensive BP control is still controversial.

Antihypertensive Therapies and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: It is widely accepted that successful lowering of blood pressure (BP) in patients with hypertension leads to regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). However, whether differences exist among pharmacological BP-lowering therapies is debated. In this report, we discuss these differences in light of recent literature and the position of extant practice guidelines. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies comparing the effects of antihypertensive classes on LVH regression reached different conclusions, but the overall direction which is reflected in current society guidelines is that successful lowering of BP is more important than selection of an individual antihypertensive class. Nevertheless, some practice guidelines added statements about considering a specific antihypertensive class for its potential benefit such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or excluding a class such as direct vasodilators. On the other hand, reports have been consistent about the more favorable effect of intensive BP-lowering strategy (target systolic BP < 120 mmHg) compared to standard BP lowering (target systolic BP > 140 mmHg), which is not yet discussed in the current practice guidelines. Successful lowering of BP leads to LVH regression. While reports have been inconsistent about differences among antihypertensive classes, lowering BP beyond currently recommended levels has consistently showed a greater effect on LVH regression.

More Versus Less Blood Pressure Lowering: An Update.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes the results of a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering, including an update with the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) results. We discuss the consistency of results within this set of trials (eg, ACCORD [Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes] and SPRINT) and the results in the context of other BP-lowering trials, including the recently published HOPE3 (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation-3) study. METHODS: This study was a narrative review with updated meta-analysis from systematic review of trials comparing more- versus less-intensive BP lowering. FINDINGS: With the addition of SPRINT, there are >20 trials comparing more- versus less-intensive treatment with 54,350 participants overall. Over an average of 3.9 years of follow-up, the average systolic BP was 133 mm Hg in the more-intensive treatment arms and 140 mm Hg in the less-intensive treatment arms. More-intensive BP lowering reduced the risk of major vascular events, with benefits seen across a range of groups defined according to baseline systolic BP (120-139 mm Hg, 140-159 mm Hg, or ≥160 mm Hg), age (<70 or >70 years), and main entry criterion (hypertension, diabetes, or renal disease). IMPLICATIONS: The evidence accumulated thus far provides clear evidence of the benefits of BP lowering in the 120- to 140-mm Hg range for various high-risk patient groups. Although intensive BP lowering has side effects, these trials indicate that the benefits will predominate for those at high risk of major vascular events.

Early Blood Pressure Lowering Does Not Reduce Growth of Intraventricular Hemorrhage following Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Results of the INTERACT Studies.

BACKGROUND: Intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) extension is common following acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and is associated with poor prognosis. AIM: To determine whether intensive blood pressure (BP)-lowering therapy reduces IVH growth. METHODS: Pooled analyses of the Intensive Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trials (INTERACT1 and INTERACT2) computed tomography (CT) substudies; multicenter, open, controlled, randomized trials of patients with acute spontaneous ICH and elevated systolic BP, randomly assigned to intensive (<140 mm Hg) or guideline-based (<180 mm Hg) BP management. Participants had blinded central analyses of baseline and 24-hour CT. Association of BP lowering to IVH growth was assessed in analysis of covariance. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in adjusted mean IVH growth following intensive (n = 228) compared to guideline-recommended (n = 228) BP treatment (1.6 versus 2.2 ml, respectively; p = 0.56). Adjusted mean IVH growth was nonsignificantly greater in patients with a mean achieved systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg over 24 h (3.94 ml; p trend = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Early intensive BP-lowering treatment had no clear effect on IVH in acute ICH.

Estimated GFR and the Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering After Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: The kidney-brain interaction has been a topic of growing interest. Past studies of the effect of kidney function on intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) outcomes have yielded inconsistent findings. Although the second, main phase of the Intensive Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trial (INTERACT2) suggests the effectiveness of early intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering in improving functional recovery after ICH, the balance of potential benefits and harms of this treatment in those with decreased kidney function remains uncertain. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of INTERACT2, which randomly assigned patients with ICH with elevated systolic BP (SBP) to intensive (target SBP<140mmHg) or contemporaneous guideline-based (target SBP<180mmHg) BP management. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 2,823 patients from 144 clinical hospitals in 21 countries. PREDICTORS: Admission estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) of patients were categorized into 3 groups based on the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) creatinine equation: normal or high, mildly decreased, and moderately to severely decreased (>90, 60-90, and <60mL/min/1.73m(2), respectively). OUTCOMES: The effect of admission eGFR on the primary outcome of death or major disability at 90 days (defined as modified Rankin Scale scores of 3-6) was analyzed using a multivariable logistic regression model. Potential effect modification of intensive BP lowering treatment by admission eGFR was assessed by interaction terms. RESULTS: Of 2,623 included participants, 912 (35%) and 280 (11%) had mildly and moderately/severely decreased eGFRs, respectively. Patients with moderately/severely decreased eGFRs had the greatest risk for death or major disability at 90 days (adjusted OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.28-2.61). Effects of early intensive BP lowering were consistent across different eGFRs (P=0.5 for homogeneity). LIMITATIONS: Generalizability issues arising from a clinical trial population. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased eGFR predicts poor outcome in acute ICH. Early intensive BP lowering provides similar treatment effects in patients with ICH with decreased eGFRs.

Blood Pressure Management in Intracranial Hemorrhage: Current Challenges and Opportunities.

OPINION STATEMENT: Non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (i.e. intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH] and subarachnoid hemorrhage [SAH]) are more life threatening and least treatable despite being less common than ischemic stroke. Elevated blood pressure (BP) is a strong predictor of poor outcome in both ICH and SAH. Data from a landmark clinical trial INTERACT 2, wherein 2839 participants enrolled with spontaneous ICH were randomly assigned to receive intensive (target systolic BP <140 mmHg) or guideline recommended BP lowering therapy (target systolic BP <180 mmHg), showed that intensive BP lowering was safe, and more favorable functional outcome and better overall health-related quality of life were seen in survivors in the intensive treatment group. These results contributed to the shift in European and American guidelines towards more aggressive early management of elevated BP in ICH. In contrast, the treatment of BP in SAH is less well defined and more complex. Although there is consensus that hypertension needs to be controlled to prevent rebleeding in the acute setting, induced hypertension in the later stages of SAH has questionable benefits.

Blood Pressure Management After Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

OPINION STATEMENT: Elevated blood pressure (BP), which presents in approximately 80 % of patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), is associated with increased risk of poor outcome. The Second Intensive Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Haemorrhage Trial (INTERACT2) study, a multinational, multicenter, randomized controlled trial published in 2013, demonstrated better functional outcomes with no harm for patients with acute spontaneous ICH within 6 h of onset who received target-driven, early intensive BP lowering (systolic BP target <140 mmHg within 1 h, continued for 7 days) and suggested that greater and faster reduction in BP might enhance the treatment effect by limiting hematoma growth. The trial resulted in revisions of guidelines for acute management of ICH, in which intensive BP lowering in patients with acute ICH is recommended as safe and effective treatment for improving functional outcome. BP lowering is also the only intervention that is proven to reduce the risk of recurrent ICH. Current evidences from several randomized trials, including PROGRESS and SPS3, indicate that long-term strict BP control in patients with ICH is safe and could offer additional benefits in major reduction in risk of recurrent ICH. The latest American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) guidelines recommended a target BP of <130/80 mmHg after ICH, but supporting evidence is limited. Randomized controlled trials are needed that focus on strict BP control, initiated early after onset of the disease and continued long-term, to demonstrate effective prevention of recurrent stroke and other major vascular events without additional harms in the ICH population.

Intensive blood pressure-lowering treatment in patients with acute lacunar infarction.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of high blood pressure (BP) during the acute stage of stroke has yet to be established. To test the extent to which BP can be lowered without causing adverse effects and to determine the safety or efficacy of administration of antihypertensive agents in acute ischemic stroke, we performed ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) before and after administration of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) with and without diuretics to monitor the ABPM profile after acute lacunar infarction. Patients with lacunar infarcts are presumed to be less vulnerable to reduced cerebral perfusion pressure in the ischemic tissue because of BP lowering. METHODS: We prospectively performed ABPM during the acute stage and around 3 weeks after ictus for 59 patients with lacunar infarction. As a historical control group, we selected 60 consecutive patients with acute lacunar infarction who were admitted during the period of 1 year before the present study and treated according to the guidelines. RESULTS: Baseline data, prevalence of progressive motor deficits, and modified Rankin Scale scores 3 months after ictus were not significantly different between both groups. ARB with or without diuretics lowered 24-hour systolic BP and diastolic BP by 27.8 and 12.7 mm Hg, daytime systolic BP and diastolic BP by 26.8 and 12.0 mm Hg, and nighttime systolic BP and diastolic BP by 30.2 and 12.0 mm Hg. The incidence of dippers tended to increase in the second measurement from 11 (18.6%) to 20 (33.8%; P=.093). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable reduction in 24-hour BP levels was attained around day 21. The limit of BP level to which BP can be safely lowered appears to be lower than that was previously considered.