Autonomic nervous system activity changes in patients with hypertension and overweight: role and therapeutic implications.

The incidence and prevalence of hypertension is increasing worldwide, with approximately 1.13 billion of people currently affected by the disease, often in association with other diseases such as diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, dyslipidemia/hypercholesterolemia, and obesity. The autonomic nervous system has been implicated in the pathophysiology of hypertension, and treatments targeting the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), a key component of the autonomic nervous system, have been developed; however, current recommendations provide little guidance on their use. This review discusses the etiology of hypertension, and more specifically the role of the SNS in the pathophysiology of hypertension and its associated disorders. In addition, the effects of current antihypertensive management strategies, including pharmacotherapies, on the SNS are examined, with a focus on imidazoline receptor agonists.

Not first-line antihypertensive agents, but still effective-The efficacy and safety of imidazoline receptor agonists: A network meta-analysis.

Cardiovascular disorders are the leading cause of death in the world. Many organ diseases (kidney, heart, and brain) are substantially more prone to develop in people with hypertension. In the treatment of hypertension, first-line medications are recommended, while imidazoline receptor agonists are not first-line antihypertensives. Our goal was to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of imidazoline receptor agonists. The meta-analysis was performed following the PRISMA guidelines using the PICOS format, considering the CONSORT recommendations. Studies were collected from four databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. A total of 5960 articles were found. After filtering, 27 studies remained eligible for network meta-analysis. Moxonidine reduced blood pressure in sitting position statistically significantly after 8 weeks of treatment (SBP MD: 23.80; 95% CI: 17.45-30.15; DBP MD: 10.90; 95% CI: 8.45-13.35) compared to placebo. Moreover, moxonidine reduced blood pressure more effectively than enalapril; however, this difference was not significant (SBP MD: 3.10; 95% CI: -2.60-8.80; DBP MD: 1.30; 95% CI: -1.25-3.85). Dry mouth was experienced as a side effect in the case of all imidazoline receptor agonists. After 8 weeks of treatment, the appearance of dry mouth was highest with clonidine (OR: 9.27 95% CI: 4.70-18.29) and lowest with rilmenidine (OR: 6.46 95% CI: 0.85-49.13) compared to placebo. Somnolence was less frequent with moxonidine compared to rilmenidine (OR: 0.63 95% CI: 0.17-2.31). Imidazoline receptor agonists were nearly as effective as the first-line drugs in the examined studies. However, their utility as antihypertensives is limited due to their side effects. As a result, they are not first-line antihypertensives and should not be used in monotherapy. However, in the case of resistant hypertension, they are a viable option. According to our findings, from the point of view of safety and efficacy, moxonidine appears to be the best choice among imidazoline receptor agonists.

Over-Prescription of the Imidazoline Receptor Agonists: Evidence for Restriction of the Therapeutic Indication.

BACKGROUND: Major antihypertensive drug classes (but not Imidazoline Receptor Agonists) have been demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In 2017, Latvia and Lithuania had the highest cardiovascular mortality among the Eastern, Central, Northern, and Western Member States of the European Union (EU). Cardiovascular mortality in Estonia is much lower than in Lithuania and Latvia. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the consumption of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in the Baltic States and its potential implications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included data on the sales of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia; the marketing authorization databases of the competent authorities; the guidelines on the treatment of hypertension, and the reimbursement conditions. RESULTS: The study showed a very high consumption of the Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania and Latvia. From 2016 to 2019, the average consumption of Imidazoline Receptor Agonists in Lithuania was 15.5 times higher than in Estonia; in Latvia, it was 8.9 times higher than in Estonia. The guidelines recommend the use of the Imidazoline Receptors Agonists as one of the last options in hypertension therapy, but the marketing authorizations do not restrict their line of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption of IRAs in Lithuania and Latvia is very high. The authorized use of the IRAs in the EU Member States is not in line with the guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension and therefore patients might be deprived of therapies that reduce the cardiovascular risk. The drug regulatory authorities of the EU should review the data on the safety and efficacy of the IRAs and restrict their therapeutic indications if necessary.

The role of selective imidazoline receptor agonists in modern hypertension management: an international real-world survey (STRAIGHT).

BACKGROUND: Multiple pharmacologic strategies are currently available to lower blood pressure (BP). Renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-inhibitors, calcium channel blockers and diuretics are widely recommended as first line therapies. Sympathetic activation is an important contributor to BP elevation but remains unopposed or is even increased by some of these drug classes. Selective imidazoline receptor agonists (SIRAs) reduce increased central sympathetic outflow and are considered as add-on therapy in most guidelines. We conducted an international survey to evaluate contemporary hypertension management strategies in countries with high prescription rates of SIRAs to better understand the rationale and practical indications for their use in a real-world setting. METHODS: Physicians from seven countries (India, Jordan, Lebanon, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, United Arab Emirates) were asked to complete a web-based questionnaire and comment on clinical case scenarios to provide information on their current practice regarding antihypertension strategies, underlying rationale for their choices, and adherence to relevant guidelines. RESULTS: 281 physicians completed the questionnaire including mainly cardiologists (35%) and general practitioners (32%). 96% reported using European (60%) or local (56%) guidelines in their daily practices. The majority of responding physicians (83%) had knowledge of SIRAs and 70% prescribed SIRAs regularly typically as a third line antihypertensive strategy (63%). The preferred combination partners for SIRAs were RAS-inhibitors (72%). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary hypertension management varies between countries and therapeutic approaches in a real-world setting are not always in line with recommendations from available guidelines. In the countries selected for this survey prescription of SIRAs was common and appeared to be guided predominantly by considerations relating to the underlying pathophysiologic mechanism of sympathetic inhibition.