Improving Clinical Care for Children With CKD: A Report From a National Kidney Foundation Scientific Workshop.

Development of clinical guidelines and recommendations to address the care of pediatric patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has rarely included the perspectives of providers from a variety of health care disciplines or the patients and parents themselves. Accordingly, the National Kidney Foundation hosted an in-person, one and a half-day workshop that convened a multidisciplinary group of physicians, allied health care professionals, and pediatric patients with CKD and their parents, with the goal of developing key clinical recommendations regarding best practices for the clinical management of pediatric patients living with CKD. The key clinical recommendations pertained to 5 broad topics: addressing the needs of patients and parents/caregivers; modifying the progression of CKD; clinical management of CKD-mineral and bone disorder and growth retardation; clinical management of anemia, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension; and transition and transfer of pediatric patients to adult nephrology care. This report describes the recommendations generated by the participants who attended the workshop.

Morbidity and mortality in patients managed with high compared with low blood pressure targets during on-pump cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Many believe that blood pressure management during cardiac surgery is associated with postoperative outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the impact of high compared with low intraoperative blood pressure targets on postoperative morbidity and mortality in adults undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Our primary objective was to inform the design of a future large RCT. SOURCE: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and CENTRAL for RCTs comparing high with low intraoperative blood pressure targets in adult patients undergoing any cardiac surgical procedure on CPB. We screened reference lists, grey literature, and conference proceedings. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We included eight RCTs (N =1,116 participants); all examined the effect of blood pressure management only during the CPB. Trial definitions of high compared with low blood pressure varied and, in some, there was a discrepancy between the target and achieved mean arterial pressure. We observed no difference in delirium, cognitive decline, stroke, acute kidney injury, or mortality between high and low blood pressure targets (very-low to low quality evidence). Higher blood pressure targets may have increased the risk of requiring a blood transfusion (three trials; n = 456 participants; relative risk, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.9; P = 0.01; moderate quality evidence) but this finding was based on a small number of trials. CONCLUSION: Individual trial definitions of high and low blood pressure targets varied, limiting inferences. The effect of high (compared with low) blood pressure targets on other morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery remains unclear because of limitations with the body of existing evidence. Research to determine the optimal management of blood pressure during cardiac surgery is required. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42020177376); registered: 5 July 2020.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Pour beaucoup, la prise en charge de la pression artérielle pendant la chirurgie cardiaque serait associée aux issues postopératoires. Nous avons réalisé une revue systématique et une méta-analyse d'études randomisées contrôlées (ERC) afin de déterminer l'impact de cibles peropératoires de pression artérielle élevées par rapport à des cibles basses sur la morbidité et la mortalité postopératoires d'adultes bénéficiant d'une chirurgie cardiaque sous circulation extracorporelle (CEC). Notre objectif principal était d'orienter la conception d'une future ERC d'envergure. SOURCES: Nous avons analysé les bases de données MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL et CENTRAL afin d'en tirer les ERC comparant des cibles de pression artérielle peropératoire élevées à des cibles basses chez des patients adultes bénéficiant d'une intervention chirurgicale cardiaque sous CEC. Nous avons passé au crible les listes de références, la littérature grise et les travaux de congrès. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Nous avons inclus huit ERC (N = 1116 participants); toutes les études ont examiné l'effet de la prise en charge de la pression artérielle uniquement pendant la CEC. Les définitions d'une pression artérielle élevée ou basse variaient d'une étude à l'autre et, dans certains cas, un écart a été noté entre la pression artérielle cible et la pression artérielle moyenne atteinte. Nous n'avons observé aucune différence dans les taux de delirium, de déclin cognitif, d'accident vasculaire cérébral, d'insuffisance rénale aiguë ou de mortalité entre les cibles de pression artérielle élevée et basse (données probantes de qualité très faible à faible). Des cibles de pression artérielle plus élevées pourraient avoir augmenté le risque de transfusion sanguine (trois études; n = 456 participants; risque relatif, 1,4; intervalle de confiance à 95 %, 1,1 à 1,9; P = 0,01; données probantes de qualité modérée), mais ce résultat se fondait sur un petit nombre d'études. CONCLUSION: Les définitions individuelles des cibles d'hypertension et d'hypotension artérielle variaient, ce qui a limité les inférences. L'effet de cibles de pression artérielle élevée (par rapport à une pression artérielle basse) sur d'autres mesures de la morbidité et de la mortalité après une chirurgie cardiaque demeure incertain en raison des limites de l'ensemble des données probantes existantes. Des recherches visant à déterminer la prise en charge optimale de la pression artérielle pendant la chirurgie cardiaque sont nécessaires. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42020177376); enregistrée le 5 juillet 2020.

Executive summary of the KDIGO 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease.

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease for patients not receiving dialysis represents an update to the KDIGO 2012 guideline on this topic. Development of this guideline update followed a rigorous process of evidence review and appraisal. Guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and appraisal of the quality of the evidence. The strength of recommendations is based on the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. The scope includes topics covered in the original guideline, such as optimal blood pressure targets, lifestyle interventions, antihypertensive medications, and specific management in kidney transplant recipients and children. Some aspects of general and cardiovascular health, such as lipid and smoking management, are excluded. This guideline also introduces a chapter dedicated to proper blood pressure measurement since all large randomized trials targeting blood pressure with pivotal outcomes used standardized preparation and measurement protocols adhered to by patients and clinicians. Based on previous and new evidence, in particular the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) results, we propose a systolic blood pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg using standardized office reading for most people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving dialysis, the exception being children and kidney transplant recipients. The goal of this guideline is to provide clinicians and patients a useful resource with actionable recommendations supplemented with practice points. The burden of the recommendations on patients and resources, public policy implications, and limitations of the evidence are taken into consideration. Lastly, knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research are provided.

How We Got Where We Are in Blood Pressure Targets.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While we started clinical trials evaluating the benefit of lowering systolic BP's >160 mm Hg and diastolic BPs of <130 mm Hg, the latest guideline suggests a target of <130/80 mm Hg in those with hypertension. This article summarizes exactly how we got to where we are looking over the last half-century. RECENT FINDINGS: Our understanding of systolic and diastolic blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes has changed substantially over the past 5 decades. Regarding diastolic blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes, initially the VA1 in 1967 had set the goal to <115 mmHg. Over time, several studies including the VA2, Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT), and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group 38 (UKPDS38) highlighted even greater cardiovascular benefit with lower diastolic targets <80 mmHg, especially in diabetic patients. Of equal importance, multiple studies have focused the attention to systolic blood pressure targets. Starting in 1948 with the Framingham study, passing through the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP), Syst-Eur and Syst-China trials, all have set the systolic blood pressure goal <150 mmHg. Most recently, the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial showed an improved cardiovascular outcome with a systolic blood pressure target <140 mmHg in patients with type 2 diabetes, while the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) in non-diabetic patients moved it closer to 120 mmHg. There is "no one size fits all" when it comes to blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes. To progress our understanding of individual blood pressure goals, future studies might develop a more standardized approach to highlight characteristics such as design and end point definitions while allowing clinical practitioners greater latitude to adapt guideline recommendations to individual patient characteristics and clinical needs.

Commentary on the KDIGO 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in CKD.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize and explain the new guideline on blood pressure (BP) management in chronic kidney disease (CKD) published by Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), an independent global nonprofit organization which develops and implements evidence-based clinical practice guidelines in kidney disease. KDIGO issued its first clinical practice guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure (BP) in Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) for patients not receiving dialysis in 2012 and now updated the guideline in 2021. RECENT FINDINGS: Recommendations in this update were developed based on systematic literature reviews and appraisal of the quality of the evidence and strength of recommendation following the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. The updated guideline includes five chapters covering BP measurement techniques, lifestyle interventions for lowering BP, and management of BP in three target populations, namely adults (with and without diabetes), kidney transplant recipients, and children. A dedicated chapter on BP measurement emphasizing standardized preparation and measurement protocols for office BP measurement is a new addition, following protocols used in large randomized trials of BP targets with pivotal clinical outcomes. Based on the available evidence, and in particular in the CKD subgroup of the SPRINT trial, the 2021 guideline suggests a systolic BP target of <120 mm Hg, based on standardized measurements, for most individuals with CKD not receiving dialysis, with the exception of kidney transplant recipients and children. This recommendation is strictly contingent on the measurement of BP using standardized office readings and not routine office readings.

Blood pressure in chronic kidney disease: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

In September 2017, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a Controversies Conference titled Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD). The purpose of the meeting was to consider which recommendations from the 2012 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in CKD should be reevaluated based on new evidence from clinical trials. Participants included a multidisciplinary panel of clinical and scientific experts. Discussions focused on the optimal means for measuring blood pressure (BP) as well as managing BP in CKD patients. Consistent with the 2012 Guideline, the conference did not address BP management in patients on maintenance dialysis.

Blood pressure targets in type 2 diabetes. Evidence against or in favour of an aggressive approach.

When associated with high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes mellitus is characterised by a high risk of adverse cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes. However, both can be effectively reduced by antihypertensive treatment. Current guidelines on the treatment of hypertension emphasize the need to effectively treat high blood pressure in diabetic individuals, but their recommendations differ in terms of the optimal target blood pressure value to aim for in order to maximise CV and renal protection. In some guidelines the recommended target blood pressure values are <140/90 mmHg (systolic/diastolic), whereas in others, blood pressure values close or even less than 130/80 mmHg are recommended. This paper will discuss the evidence for and against a conservative or more aggressive blood pressure target for treated diabetic hypertensive individuals based on the evidence provided by randomised trials, trial meta-analyses and large observational studies. Based on the available evidence, it appears that blood pressure targets will probably have to be lower than <140/90 mmHg, and that values approaching 130/80 mmHg should be recommended. However, evidence in favour of even lower systolic values, i.e. <130 mmHg, is limited and is definitively against a reduction to <120 mmHg.

Arterial hypertension. Does the J curve exist? And then?

The concept that 'the lower the blood pressure (BP) achieved the better the outcome' rests on the demonstration of a direct relationship between BP and incident outcomes, down to levels of 115 mmHg of systolic BP (sBP) and 75 mmHg of diastolic BP (dBP) carried out in 1 million individuals from 61 cohorts recruited between 1950 and 1990 and followed for about 14 years. The alternative to the 'lower the better' concept is the hypothesis of a J-shaped relationship, according to which the benefits of reducing sBP or dBP to low values may be dangerous leading even to an increase in total mortality and/or in CV outcomes. Data from contemporary epidemiologic observations,  (CALIBER study), showed that the relationships between rising BP  and increased incidence of outcomes rise continuous even over 85 years of age without the evidence of a  J-shaped  association  with  any  of  the  outcomes at any age strata. In the English Longitudinal  Study  of  Ageing  study (ELSA), a tailored analysis for octogenarians showed that the increase in mortality rates associated with BP ranges appears at sBP  <110 mmHg and ≥170 mmHg.  In randomized controlled trials (SPRINT, HYVET and INVEST), the J curve seems to concern mainly patients with an  extensive atherosclerotic burden, rather than. An impaired autoregulation of coronary blood flow (CBF) leading to a fall in diastolic BP and resulting in a lowering in the perfusion pressure distal to the epicardial coronary artery stenosis, can eventually lead  to myocardial ischemia.  Diastolic dysfunction can concur in worsening CBF in diastole.  These features are often seen in elderly patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. The steeper position of the slope of the end-systolic elastance can lead to dramatic increases and decreases in BP for the same change in afterload or preload. This may explain why elderly hypertensives are more prone to suffer of hypertensive crisis and/or hypotension than younger hypertensives. "Pseudo-hypertension" caused by structural sclerotic changes in the brachial artery wall may cause overtreatment related falls in blood pressure. Thus, the J curve exists but only in patients with multiple comorbidities and/or extensive atherosclerotic burden.

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.

The design and rationale of a multicenter clinical trial comparing two strategies for control of systolic blood pressure: the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

BACKGROUND: High blood pressure is an important public health concern because it is highly prevalent and a risk factor for adverse health outcomes, including coronary heart disease, stroke, decompensated heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and decline in cognitive function. Observational studies show a progressive increase in risk associated with blood pressure above 115/75 mm Hg. Prior research has shown that reducing elevated systolic blood pressure lowers the risk of subsequent clinical complications from cardiovascular disease. However, the optimal systolic blood pressure to reduce blood pressure-related adverse outcomes is unclear, and the benefit of treating to a level of systolic blood pressure well below 140 mm Hg has not been proven in a large, definitive clinical trial. PURPOSE: To describe the design considerations of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) and the baseline characteristics of trial participants. METHODS: The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial is a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial that compares two strategies for treating systolic blood pressure: one targets the standard target of <140 mm Hg, and the other targets a more intensive target of <120 mm Hg. Enrollment focused on volunteers of age ≥50 years (no upper limit) with an average baseline systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg and evidence of cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, 10-year Framingham cardiovascular disease risk score ≥15%, or age ≥75 years. The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial recruitment also targeted three pre-specified subgroups: participants with chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), participants with a history of cardiovascular disease, and participants 75 years of age or older. The primary outcome is first the occurrence of a myocardial infarction (MI), acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular disease death. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, decline in kidney function or development of end-stage renal disease, incident dementia, decline in cognitive function, and small-vessel cerebral ischemic disease. RESULTS: Between 8 November 2010 and 15 March 2013, Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial recruited and randomized 9361 people at 102 clinics, including 3331 women, 2648 with chronic kidney disease, 1877 with a history of cardiovascular disease, 3962 minorities, and 2636 ≥75 years of age. LIMITATIONS: Although the overall recruitment target was met, the numbers recruited in the high-risk subgroups were lower than planned. CONCLUSIONS: The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial will provide important information on the risks and benefits of intensive blood pressure treatment targets in a diverse sample of high-risk participants, including those with prior cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and those aged ≥75 years.

How low should blood pressure be in patients with chronic coronary and cerebrovascular diseases.

Over the last three decades, there are an increasing number of investigators and meta-analyses focusing on the fact that lowering blood pressure levels below a critical point is no longer beneficial and possibly even deleterious. In recent years, several trials and meta-analyses assessing intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering found that intensive treatment and lower blood pressure levels are associated with a reduction in CV events and mortality. However, a careful examination of the results shows that current data are not easily applicable to the general hypertensive population. In addition, recommendations of different guidelines since 2017 so far suggest different BP levels regarding the systolic and diastolic thresholds to be achieved and maintained, particularly in specific clinical situations such as patients with coronary artery disease and stroke. The challenge is to better define the limits of intervention and to define phenotypes of patients who are particularly vulnerable to over-aggressive lowering of blood pressure. This article reviews the evidence, controversies and current state of knowledge regarding intensive BP lowering and the lower thresholds of BP to be achieved in patients with chronic coronary or cerebrovascular diseases.

Blood pressure targets in CKD 2021: the never-ending guidelines debacle.

In 2021, two updated clinical guidelines were published, providing guidance on blood pressure (BP) targets for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) updated its 2012 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of BP in CKD. Different systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) targets for CKD (<130/80 and <140/90 mmHg, respectively, for people with a urinary albumin: creatinine ratio >30 mg/g or without pathological albuminuria) were replaced by a single number: an SBP target of <120 mmHg is suggested, when tolerated. This represents a major decrease in the SBP target and the abandonment of DBP targets. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) also published a 2021 Clinical Guideline on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice that updates a prior 2016 guideline on prevention and the 2018 ESC/European Society of Hypertension Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension. The 2021 ESC guideline was endorsed by 12 European scientific societies. The recommended office BP targets for people with CKD are <140-130 mmHg SBP (lower SBP is acceptable if tolerated) and <80 mmHg DBP. The question is: What should the practicing physician do now: treat hypertension in people with CKD to an SBP target of <120 mmHg or to a target of <140-130 mmHg? Major guideline bodies are aware of the activities of other major players. There is an urgent need for guideline bodies to establish communication channels, search consensus on major issues that impact the health of hundreds of millions of people worldwide and end individualism in guidelines generation.

Tight Blood Pressure Control in Chronic Kidney Disease.

Hypertension affects over a billion people worldwide and is the leading cause of cardiovascular disease and premature death worldwide, as well as one of the key determinants of chronic kidney disease worldwide. People with chronic kidney disease and hypertension are at very high risk of renal outcomes, including progression to end-stage renal disease, and, even more importantly, cardiovascular outcomes. Hence, blood pressure control is crucial in reducing the human and socio-economic burden of renal and cardiovascular outcomes in those patients. However, current guidelines from hypertension and renal societies have issued different and sometimes conflicting recommendations, which risk confusing clinicians and potentially contributing to a less effective prevention of renal and cardiovascular outcomes. In this review, we critically appraise existing evidence and key international guidelines, and we finally formulate our own opinion that clinicians should aim for a blood pressure target lower than 130/80 in all patients with chronic kidney disease and hypertension, unless they are frail or with multiple comorbidities. We also advocate for an even more ambitious systolic blood pressure target lower than 120 mmHg in younger patients with a lower burden of comorbidities, to minimise their risk of renal and cardiovascular events during their lifetime.

Intensive Blood Pressure Treatment Goals: Evidence for Cardiovascular Protection From Observational Studies and Clinical Trials.

Epidemiologic studies have consistently identified a strong, progressive relationship between blood pressure (BP) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, in a range of systolic BP (SBP) from as low as 90 mm Hg to as high as 180 mm Hg. Clinical trials have demonstrated greater prevention of CVD with more compared with less intensive antihypertensive drug treatment. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials provide strong evidence for more intensive antihypertensive drug therapy down to an SBP of 130 mm Hg, and to an SBP 120-124 mm Hg in the meta-analysis with the greatest statistical power. In the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) randomization to an SBP treatment goal of <120 mm Hg compared with <140 mm Hg in persons with high CVD risk not only reduced the rate of CVD but also all-cause mortality. These benefits were noted in all of the prestated subgroups of interest, including those ≥65 years of age at baseline. In addition, cognitive impairment was less common in those randomized to the intensive compared with standard treatment. Most clinical practice guidelines recommend an SBP treatment target <130 mm Hg in adults with a high risk of CVD, which is the norm for many patients seen in clinical practice, especially those who are older, have diabetes mellitus, or chronic kidney disease.

The "Blood pressure and oxygenation targets in post resuscitation care, a randomized clinical trial": design and statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: Comatose patients admitted after resuscitation from cardiac arrest have a significant risk of poor outcome due to hypoxic brain injury. While numerous studies have investigated and challenged the target temperature as the efficacious part of the guideline endorsed Targeted Temperature Management (TTM) protocols, our knowledge and how the remaining parts of the TTM are optimized remain sparse. The present randomized trial investigated two aspects of the TTM protocol: target blood pressure during the ICU stay and oxygenation during mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, the efficacy of device-based post-TTM fever management is addressed. METHODS: Investigator-initiated, dual-center, randomized clinical trial in comatose OHCA patients admitted to an intensive cardiac care unit. Patients are eligible for inclusion if unconscious, older than 18 years of age, and have return of spontaneous circulation for more than 20 min. INTERVENTION: allocation 1:1:1:1 into a group defined by (a) blood pressure targets in double-blind intervention targeting a mean arterial blood pressure of 63 or 77 mmHg and (b) restrictive (9-10 kPa) or liberal (13-14 kPa) of arterial oxygen concentration during mechanical ventilation. As a subordinate intervention, device-based active fever management is discontinued after 36 h or 72. Patients will otherwise receive protocolized standard of care according to international guidelines, including targeted temperature management at 36 °C for 24 h, sedation with fentanyl and propofol, and multimodal neuro-prognostication. Primary endpoint: Discharge from hospital in poor neurological status (Cerebral Performance category 3 or 4) or death, whichever comes first. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Time to initiation of renal replacement therapy or death, neuron-specific enolase (NSE) level at 48 h, MOCA score at day 90, Modified Ranking Scale (mRS) and CPC at 3 months, NT-pro-BNP at 90 days, eGFR and LVEF at 90 days, daily cumulated vasopressor requirement during ICU stay, and need for a combination of vasopressors and inotropic agents or mechanical circulatory support. DISCUSSION: We hypothesize that low or high target blood pressure and restrictive and liberal oxygen administration will have an impact on mortality by reducing the risk and degree of hypoxic brain injury. This will be assessment neurological outcome and biochemical and neuropsychological testing after 90 days. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03141099. Registered on May 2017 (retrospectively registered).

[2022 Practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the Spanish Society of Hypertension]. / Guía práctica sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la hipertensión arterial en España, 2022. Sociedad Española de Hipertensión - Liga Española para la Lucha contra la Hipertensión Arterial (SEH-LELHA).

Hypertension is the most important risk factor for global disease burden. Detection and management of hypertension are considered as key issues for individual and public health, as adequate control of blood pressure levels markedly reduces morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension. Aims of these practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the Spanish Society of Hypertension include offering simplified schemes for diagnosis and treatment for daily practice, and strategies for public health promotion. The Spanish Society of Hypertension assumes the 2018 European guidelines for management of arterial hypertension developed by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension, although relevant aspects of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines and the 2020 International Society of Hypertension guidelines are also commented. Hypertension is defined as a persistent elevation in office systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg, and assessment of out-of-office blood pressure and global cardiovascular risk are considered of key importance for evaluation and management of hypertensive patients. The target for treated blood pressure should be < 130/80 for most patients. The treatment of hypertension involves lifestyle interventions and drug therapy. Most people with hypertension need more than one antihypertensive drug for adequate control, so initial therapy with two drugs, and single pill combinations are recommended for a wide majority of hypertensive patients.

A "20/20" Match: ACC/AHA 2017 versus ESC/ESH 2018 Guidelines for Management of Hypertension.

Hypertension, the commonest noncommunicable disease globally, is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and renal failure. Theoretically, while it is easy to diagnose and manage by simple measures, practically it has been observed that not only treatment but also diagnosis and its preventive measures are inadequate in developing as well as developed nations. Several guidelines by various international organizations are available to guide clinicians for hypertension management. Though the basic principles of hypertension management are similar in all the guidelines, subtle differences are there. In this article, we compare the two most widely accepted guidelines for hypertension, that is, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association 2017 Hypertension Guidelines and 2018 European Society of Cardiology and European Society of Hypertension Guidelines on Hypertension. Both the differences and similarities between these two widely followed guidelines are presented.

Contributions of Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressures to Cardiovascular Outcomes in the ALLHAT Study.

BACKGROUND: SBP and DBP have important associations with cardiovascular events, but are seldom considered simultaneously. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to simultaneously analyze systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) measurements on the associated risk of a primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), congestive heart failure (CHF), or stroke. METHODS: This study analyzed ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) data, which randomized adults to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril. The authors evaluated the simultaneous association of repeated SBP and DBP measurements on the primary composite outcome, and each outcome using proportional hazards regression. The authors report hazard ratios using a "heat map" to represent high and low risk according to SBP and DBP combinations. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4.4 years (interquartile range: 3.6-5.4 years), 33,357 participants experienced 2,636 MIs, 866 CHF events, 936 strokes, and 3,700 deaths; 8,138 patients (24.4%) had at least 1 event. For the composite outcome, all-cause mortality, MI, and CHF, a U-shaped association was observed with SBP and DBP, but the SBP and DBP associated with the lowest hazards differed for each outcome. For example, SBP/DBP of 140-155/70-80 mm Hg was associated with the lowest HR for all-cause mortality, compared with 110-120/85-90 mm Hg for MI and 125-135/70-75 mm Hg for CHF. In contrast, the association of SBP and stroke was linear. CONCLUSIONS: The risk pattern of SBP and DBP differs by clinical outcomes, and the SBP and DBP associated with the lowest risk. Our results suggest individualization of blood pressure targets may depend in part on the cardiovascular event for which the patient is most at risk.

Cardiovascular Benefits of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition Plus Calcium Channel Blockade in Patients Achieving Tight Blood Pressure Control and With Resistant Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: The 2017 hypertension guidelines lowered systolic blood pressure (BP) goals to <130 mm Hg and redefined resistant hypertension. We investigated if these changes alter the cardiovascular benefits demonstrated by combining a calcium channel blocker (CCB), rather than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI). METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the Avoiding Cardiovascular Events Through Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension trial (n = 11,506), we compared the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for angina, resuscitation after sudden cardiac death, and coronary revascularization) between the 2 combination-treatment limbs in patients achieving a systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg and those with "apparent resistant hypertension" (prescribed ≥4 antihypertensive medications). RESULTS: Among study patients, 5,221 (45.4%) achieved a systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg. There were fewer primary endpoints in the amlodipine/benazepril (9.2%) vs. the HCTZ/benazepril (10.9%) limb (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.99). There were also fewer primary endpoints in the amlodipine/benazepril (12.8%) vs. the HCTZ/benazepril (15.2%) limb (n = 4,451, 38.7%) among patients with apparent resistant hypertension (HR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.70-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy adding a CCB, rather than HCTZ, to an ACEI was more effective in preventing composite cardiovascular events even in hypertensive patients achieving aggressive systolic BP targets as well as in those with apparent resistant hypertension. Our findings add support that most patients, including those following contemporary clinical guidelines, will benefit from this combination. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Trial Number NCT00170950.