Effectiveness of olmesartan-based treatment on home and clinic blood pressure in elderly patients with masked and white coat hypertension.

Few large-scale studies have evaluated the effectiveness of angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with masked hypertension (MH) and white coat hypertension (WCH) based on age using real-world blood pressure (BP) data. We used data from the Home BP measurement with Olmesartan Naive patients to Establish Standard Target BP (HONEST) study to investigate the effectiveness of olmesartan-based treatment by patient age (<65 years of age, n = 9817; 65-74 years of age, n = 6792; ⩾ 75 years of age, n = 4732), focusing on morning home BP (strongly associated with cardiovascular disease and useful for MH and WCH diagnosis). Sixteen weeks of treatment changed morning home BP (mean systolic/diastolic) by -18.1/-9.7, -15.9/-7.4 and -14.2/-6.4 mm Hg and clinic BP by -20.1/-11.3, -17.3/-8.7 and -15.4/-7.2 mm Hg, in these age groups, respectively (P < 0.0001). Pulse pressure decreased (-7.8 to -8.8 mm Hg, P < 0.0001). Patients aged ⩾ 80 years experienced similar BP and pulse pressure changes. In patients aged ⩾ 75 years, mean morning and clinic BP after 16 weeks was 137.5/74.8 and 129.7/70.4 mm Hg, respectively, in MH patients and 132.3/72.2 and 139.7/72.7 mm Hg, respectively, in WCH patients. Regardless of age, only elevated clinic or home BP values decreased to target ranges. The incidence of adverse effects associated with excessive BP lowering was low in all of the age groups. In conclusion, our study suggests that olmesartan-based treatment was safe and useful for managing MH, WCH and sustained hypertension in elderly patients. The lack of a placebo group was a limitation of the study.

Clinical status and outcome of Japanese heart failure patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction treated with carvedilol.

The effect of beta-blockers in treating Japanese heart failure (HF) patients with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) is unclear. This prospective observational study enrolled 1,682 Japanese HF patients who received carvedilol for the first time. Patients were followed for a mean of 1.6 years. The 1,492 patients with baseline LVEF measurements were allocated to the following groups: reduced EF (LVEF < 40%; n = 724), borderline EF (LVEF 4050%; n = 355), and preserved EF (LVEF ≥ 50%; n = 413). Baseline characteristics, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, change in B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level, and long-term outcome were compared among the groups. Patients with preserved EF were more likely to be older, female, and have ischemic etiology and hypertension than patients with reduced EF. Carvedilol maintenance dosage was lower in patients with preserved EF (7.9 mg/day versus 6.6 mg/ day). NYHA class and BNP level were lower in patients with preserved EF at baseline but improved to the same level in all groups at 6 months. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the hazard ratio for death or hospitalization due to cardiovascular disease in patients with preserved EF versus those with reduced EF was 1.031 (P = 0.847). This study elucidated the characteristics of HF patients given carvedilol in "real world" clinical settings. A comparative controlled study is necessary to elucidate whether the improvements in NYHA and BNP as well as the outcome profile observed in patients with preserved EF were caused by the favorable effects of carvedilol.