The Western and Chinese exercise training for blood pressure reduction among hypertensive patients: An overview of systematic reviews.

Hypertension remains the world's leading cause of premature death. Interventions such as exercise, diet modification, and pharmacological therapy remain the mainstay of hypertension treatment. Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated the effectiveness of western exercises, such as aerobic exercise and resistance exercise, in reducing blood pressure in hypertensive patients. There is recently emerging evidence of blood pressure reduction with Chinese exercises, such as Tai Chi, Baduanjin, and Qigong. The current overview of systematic reviews aims to evaluate the quality and descriptively summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of western and Chinese exercises for hypertension management. Thirty-nine systematic reviews were included in this overview, with 15 of those being on Chinese exercise. Evidence suggests that exercise training, regardless of Western or Chinese exercise, generally reduced both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. High-intensity intermittent training did not further reduce blood pressure when compared to moderate-intensity continuous training. Conflicting results on the effectiveness of blood pressure reduction when comparing Chinese and Western exercise training were observed. This suggests the comparable effectiveness of Chinese exercise training, in particularly Tai Chi, to general or aerobic exercise training in terms of blood pressure reduction. The Chinese exercise modality and intensity may be more suitable for the middle-aged and elderly population.

Effects of the valsartan/amlodipine combination and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system monotherapy on brachial pulse pressure and radial augmentation index in hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVE: In a substudy of a randomized controlled trial, we investigated the effects of the valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) monotherapy on brachial pulse pressure (bPP) and radial augmentation index (rAI) in patients with previously uncontrolled hypertension. METHODS: We performed measurements of clinic blood pressure (BP) and pulse rate and rAI (n = 63) and ambulatory BP monitoring (n = 42) at baseline and 12-week of follow-up. Analysis of covariance was performed to calculate the least square mean change from baseline and between-group differences [95% confidence interval (CI)]. Correlation analysis was performed to study the interrelationship between the changes in bPP and rAI and in pulse rate. RESULTS: After 12-week treatment, clinic and ambulatory SBP/DBP and pulse rate were not differently changed between the valsartan/amlodipine (n = 29) and nifedipine GITS groups (n = 34, P ≥ 0.06) except daytime SBP (P = 0.01). The reductions in 24-h and daytime ambulatory bPP were significantly greater in the former than the latter group (P ≤ 0.04). rAI increased slightly by 3.5% (P = 0.20) and 5.2% (P = 0.06) in the valsartan/amlodipine and nifedipine groups, respectively, with a between-group difference of -1.7% (95% CI -9.6 to 6.1%, P = 0.66). In the two groups combined, the changes in clinic and ambulatory bPP were not or weakly associated with that in clinic or ambulatory pulse rate (r = -0.14 to 0.36, P = 0.02-0.95), while the changes in rAI were more strongly or significantly associated with that in clinic or ambulatory pulse rate (r = -0.39 to -0.23, P = 0.02-0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Antihypertensive drug-induced changes in rAI but not bPP were dependent on pulse rate.

Treatment of Masked Hypertension with a Chinese Herbal Formula: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Masked hypertension is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Nonetheless, no randomized controlled trials exist in the treatment of masked hypertension. The aim of this randomized, placebo-controlled trial was to investigate the efficacy and safety of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment with a Chinese herbal formula, gastrodia-uncaria granules, in patients with masked hypertension. METHODS: Patients with an office BP of <140/90 mm Hg and daytime ambulatory BP of 135 to 150 mm Hg systolic or 85 to 95 mm Hg diastolic were randomly assigned 1:1 to the treatment of gastrodia-uncaria granules or placebo 5 to 10 g twice daily for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in daytime ambulatory BP. RESULTS: At baseline, office and daytime BP of the 251 participants (mean age, 50.4 years; 53.4% men; mean body mass index 24.5 kg/m2; and 2.8%, 1.6%, and 30.7% with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and smoking, respectively) averaged 129/82 and 135/89 mm Hg, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, daytime systolic/diastolic BP was reduced by 5.44/3.39 and 2.91/1.60 mm Hg in the gastrodia-uncaria granules and placebo groups, respectively. The between-group difference in BP reductions was significant for the daytime (2.52/1.79 mm Hg; P≤0.025) and 24-hour BP (2.33/1.49 mm Hg; P≤0.012), but not for the clinic and nighttime BPs (P≥0.162). The per-protocol analysis in 229 patients produced similar results. Only 1 adverse event (sleepiness during the day) was reported, and no serious adverse event occurred. CONCLUSIONS: BP-lowering treatment with Chinese traditional medicine gastrodia-uncaria granules is efficacious for patients with masked hypertension. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02156024.

A randomized cross-over study on the blood pressure lowering effect of the combined passive head-up and -down movement with Device-Guided slow breathing.

Purpose: Baroreflex emerges as a therapeutic target of hypertension. We investigated blood pressure (BP) lowering effect of the combined passive head-up and -down movement with device-guided slow breathing in untreated mild hypertension or high-normal BP. Methods: In a randomized, cross-over trial, untreated subjects with an ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP of 125-140/80-90 mmHg and a clinic BP of 130-150/80-90 mmHg were randomized to intervention treatment with head movement and slow breathing or sham control, and then crossed over. Both treatments consisted of 1-week preparation, 2-week treatment, and 1-week recovery. During the 2-week treatment, subjects were treated for a session of 20 min/day. BP, pulse rate and respiration were measured before and after each treatment session. Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed at baseline and the end of the 2-week treatments' period, and home BP monitoring in the morning and evening for the whole 8-week follow-up period. Results: 14 subjects completed the study. The intervention treatment, compared to control, reduced respiration rate by -2.1 breaths/min (95% CI -2.9 to -1.2, p = .0001), but not clinic BP and pulse rate (p ≥ .67). The intervention treatment, compared to control, significantly reduced nighttime systolic/diastolic blood pressure by -5.63/-3.82 mm Hg (p ≤ .01) but not 24-h or daytime ambulatory blood pressure (p ≥ .69). Home BP decreased with the intervention treatment, but the between-treatment difference was not statistically significant (p ≥ .27). Conclusions: The combined head movement with slow breathing did not influence 24-h BP, but reduced nighttime BP in untreated mild hypertension or high-normal BP.

A randomized controlled trial on the blood pressure-lowering effect of amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS in sustained hypertension.

In a multicenter, randomized trial, we investigated whether the long half-time dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker amlodipine was more efficacious than the gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) formulation of nifedipine in lowering ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in sustained hypertension (clinic systolic/diastolic BP 140-179/90-109 mm Hg and 24-hour systolic/diastolic BP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg). Eligible patients were randomly assigned to amlodipine 5-10 mg/day or nifedipine-GITS 30-60 mg/day. Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed for 24 hours at baseline and 4-week treatment and for 48 hours at 8-week treatment with a dose of medication missed on the second day. After 8-week treatment, BP was similarly reduced in the amlodipine (n = 257) and nifedipine-GITS groups (n = 248) for both clinic and ambulatory (24-hour systolic/diastolic BP 10.3/6.5 vs 10.9/6.3 mm Hg, P ≥ 0.24) measurements. However, after missing a dose of medication, ambulatory BP reductions were greater in the amlodipine than nifedipine-GITS group, with a significant (P ≤ 0.04) between-group difference in 24-hour (-1.2 mm Hg) and daytime diastolic BP (-1.5 mm Hg). In conclusion, amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS were efficacious in reducing 24-hour BP. When a dose of medication was missed, amlodipine became more efficacious than nifedipine-GITS.

Efficacy and tolerability of initial high vs low doses of S-(-)-amlodipine in hypertension.

In an 8-week randomized trial of patients with mild or moderate hypertension, the authors investigated the efficacy and tolerability of initial high (5.0 mg/d) vs low (2.5 mg/d) doses of S-(-)-amlodipine (equivalent to 5 and 10 mg of racemic amlodipine, respectively). In the S-(-)-amlodipine 2.5-mg group (n=263), 24-hour ambulatory systolic/diastolic blood pressure (±standard deviation) decreased from 131.5±15.0/82.1±10.7 mm Hg at baseline to 126.0±13.5/78.5±9.5 mm Hg at 8 weeks of follow-up by a least square mean (±standard error) change of 6.0±0.6/3.8±0.4 mm Hg. In the S-(-)-amlodipine 5-mg group (n=260), the corresponding changes were from 133.6±13.7/83.1±9.9 mm Hg to 125.0±12.0/78.2±8.9 mm Hg by 8.1±0.6/4.7±0.4 mm Hg, respectively. The between-group differences in changes in 24-hour systolic/diastolic blood pressure were 2.1/0.9 (P=.02/.17) mm Hg. Similar trends were observed for daytime and nighttime ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. The incidence rate was similar for all adverse events. An initial high dose of S-(-)-amlodipine improved ambulatory blood pressure control with similar tolerability as an initial low dose in hypertension.

Valsartan/amlodipine compared to nifedipine GITS in patients with hypertension inadequately controlled by monotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Current hypertension guidelines recommend single-pill combinations because they not only improve convenience and compliance to therapy and thus blood pressure (BP) control, but also reduce health-care costs. This study compared the efficacy and safety of valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination with nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) in Chinese patients with hypertension who were inadequately controlled with monotherapy. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, active-controlled, parallel-group study, 564 patients with hypertension not adequately controlled by prior monotherapy were randomized to receive valsartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg or nifedipine GITS 30 mg once daily for 12 weeks. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis (n = 540), valsartan/amlodipine (n = 272) showed a least-square mean reduction of -16.6 versus -10.8 mmHg by nifedipine GITS (n = 268; mean between-treatment difference: -5.8 mmHg; P < 0.0001) from baseline to week 12. The corresponding results for mean sitting diastolic BP were -8.6 and -4.6 mmHg, respectively (difference: -4.0 mmHg; P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients achieving the BP target (<140/90 or <130/80 mmHg in the absence or presence of diabetes mellitus, respectively) was significantly higher with valsartan/amlodipine (79.0%) versus nifedipine GITS (57.4%; P < 0.0001). The overall incidence rate of adverse events was lower with valsartan/amlodipine (19.2%) than with nifedipine GITS (29.4%; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The valsartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg single-pill combination is well tolerated and more effective than nifedipine GITS 30 mg for BP control in Chinese patients with hypertension.

Current management of intracerebral haemorrhage in China: a national, multi-centre, hospital register study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine current practice of the management and secondary prevention of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) in China where the disease is more common than in Western populations. METHODS: Data on baseline characteristics, management in-hospital and post-stroke, and outcome of ICH patients are from the ChinaQUEST (QUality Evaluation of Stroke Care and Treatment) study, a multi-centre, prospective, 62 hospital registry in China during 2006-07. RESULTS: Nearly all ICH patients (n = 1572) received an intravenous haemodiluting agent such as mannitol (96%) or a neuroprotectant (72%), and there was high use of intravenous traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) (42%). Neurosurgery was undertaken in 137 (9%) patients; being overweight, having a low Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on admission, and Total Anterior Circulation Syndrome (TACS) clinical pattern on admission, were the only baseline factors associated with this intervention in multivariate analyses. Neurosurgery was associated with nearly three times higher risk of death/disability at 3 months post-stroke (odd ratio [OR] 2.60, p < 0.001). Continuation of antihypertensives in-hospital and at 3 and 12 months post-stroke was reported in 732/935 (78%), 775/935 (83%), and 752/935 (80%) living patients with hypertension, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The management of ICH in China is characterised by high rates of use of intravenous haemodiluting agents, neuroprotectants, and TCM, and of antihypertensives for secondary prevention. The controversial efficacy of these therapies, coupled with the current lack of treatments of proven benefit, is a call for action for more outcomes based research in ICH.

Age and gender variations in the management of ischaemic stroke in China.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major health issue in China. AIMS: We aimed to describe the management of patients admitted to hospitals in China with acute ischaemic stroke, and to determine whether there were any differences by age and gender. METHODS: Using a multicentre prospective hospital register across all eight major economic (geographic) regions in China, data on the socioeconomic characteristics, medical history, clinical features, and in-hospital investigations, management, and outcomes were collected on consecutive patients with acute stroke due to cerebral ischaemia during a 5-month period in 2006. RESULTS: Overall, traditional Chinese medicine and neuroprotectant use were remarkably high, with nearly 80% of patients receiving the former and >70% receiving the latter in hospital. Length of hospital stay was also long (median duration 16-days). Multivariate analyses revealed no clinically important differences in management between the genders. For the age-specific analyses, there were significant trends of decreasing use of thrombolysis (P=0·04), warfarin (P=0·01), corticosteroids (P=0·03), and lipid-lowering therapy (P=0·001); however, more assisted feeding (P=0·004) and rising rates of disability and in-hospital complications occurred with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: New information is provided regarding the current state of ischaemic stroke management in China. Notably, there is high use of traditional Chinese medicine and neuroprotectants and long lengths of hospital stay. Similar to many other countries, differences in stroke care and management by age and gender also exist to a small extent in China.

Ongoing trials: what should we expect after ALLHAT?

The publication of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) results, when used in conjunction with a new meta-analysis, provides hypertension research with a watershed. Data demonstrate clearly that lowering blood pressure is the most important aspect of hypertension management, and that all agents are similarly effective. There is little sustainable evidence for pressure-independent advantages for any class of drug at this time. Therefore, by combining these findings with additional information on target levels of blood pressure and safety, plus the use of aspirin and statins, we can formulate health care policies that attack hypertension in a holistic risk-based way. The future will focus on gaining extra benefit for patients by testing the efficacy and superiority of drug combinations using novel agents that favorably influence intermediate markers such as arterial stiffness, and arresting the ever-increasing burden of cognitive impairment and dementia.

Relationship between treatment-induced changes in left ventricular mass and blood pressure in black african hypertensive patients: results of the Baragwanath Trial.

BACKGROUND: In a single-center study, we compared to what extent changes in conventional and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) predicted regression of left ventricular mass (LVM) index in response to antihypertensive treatment in previously untreated and treated patients with sustained hypertension. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 173 black African patients who, off treatment, had a daytime diastolic BP ranging from 90 to 114 mm Hg. Antihypertensive drugs were titrated and combined to reduce the daytime diastolic BP below 90 mm Hg. Echocardiograms were obtained at baseline and follow-up. Mean systolic/diastolic clinic BP, 24-hour BP, and LVM index were similar in previously untreated (n=64) and previously treated (n=109) patients and averaged 171/102 mm Hg, 151/97 mm Hg, and 118 g/m2, respectively. At 4 months, these values had decreased (P<0.001) by 26/12 mm Hg, 23/14 mm Hg, and 14 g/m2 in previously untreated patients and by 22/9 mm Hg, 21/13 mm Hg, and 19 g/m2 in previously treated patients. In the previously untreated patients, the regression in LVM index correlated to a similar degree (P=0.09) with the decreases in the conventional (r=0.34; P=0.005) and the 24-hour (r=0.26; P=0.04) systolic BP. In the previously treated patients, the corresponding correlations were 0.02 (P=0.82) and -0.10 (P=0.32), respectively. Compared with the 24-hour systolic BP, automated oscillometric measurements of systolic BP obtained at the clinic yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In previously untreated patients with sustained hypertension followed at a single center, reductions in clinic and ambulatory systolic pressure in response to antihypertensive treatment equally predicted the regression in LVM index.