The unilateral measurement of blood pressure may mask the diagnosis or delay the effective treatment of hypertension.

Several studies have indicated the presence of significant interarm blood pressure (BP) differences; this could result in misclassification of BP status. Nevertheless, the findings of these studies were not consistent. This prospective, observational study investigated the presence and magnitude of interarm BP differences and determined the influence of age, gender, arm circumference, smoking, being hypertensive or diabetic, or having a previous history of cardiovascular disease in these differences. The study included 384 subjects, who were patients, ward visitors, and members of the nursing staff of this Department. BP measurements were recorded simultaneously in both arms by using 2 validated, fully automated oscillometric electronic devices. There were significant differences between the right arm and left arm systolic BP (p < 0.0005), between right arm and left arm diastolic BP (p < 0.05), and between right arm and left arm pulse pressure (p = 0.006). The mean interarm differences in systolic and diastolic BP measurements were 1.2 +/-5.0 mm Hg and 0.4 +/-4.2 mm Hg, respectively. There were 13 subjects (3.4%) and 4 subjects (1.04%) with an interarm systolic and diastolic BP difference of > 10 mm Hg, respectively, and a single patient with both interarm systolic and diastolic BP differences of > 10 mm Hg (0.26%). None of the studied demographic or clinical characteristics was a significant predictor of interarm systolic and diastolic BP differences. The authors conclude that significant interarm systolic and diastolic BP differences are frequently present. Therefore, the unilateral measurement of BP may mask the diagnosis or delay the effective treatment of hypertension. It is thus recommended that BP should be simultaneously measured in both arms at the initial consultation and the higher of the 2 readings should be used to guide further management decisions.

Lamivudine/pegylated interferon alfa-2b sequential combination therapy compared with lamivudine monotherapy in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Monotherapy has been proven insufficient in achieving sustained control of chronic hepatitis B. We aimed to assess the efficacy of combined sequential administration of lamivudine and pegylated interferon alfa-2b in patients with hepatitis Be antigen (HBeAg)-negative chronic hepatitis B. METHODS: Eighteen patients were given sequential combination treatment starting with 3 months of lamivudine monotherapy followed by 9 months of pegylated interferon alfa-2b (after a 3-month period of concomitant administration of the two drugs) and 24 patients received lamivudine monotherapy. RESULTS: At the end of treatment, 88.9% of the patients who received sequential combination treatment and 70.8% of those who received lamivudine monotherapy had hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels below 400 copies/mL (P = not significant). At the end of treatment, 72.2% of the patients who received sequential combination treatment and 70.8% of those who received lamivudine monotherapy achieved alanine aminotransferase normalization (P = not significant). After 12 months of follow up, 33.3% of the patients who received sequential combination treatment and 16.7% of those who received lamivudine monotherapy had HBV-DNA levels below 400 copies/mL (P = 0.4). After 12 months of follow up, 72.2% of the patients who received sequential combination treatment and 25.0% of those who received lamivudine monotherapy had normal alanine aminotransferase levels (P < 0.01). Twenty-five percent of the patients in the lamivudine monotherapy group had virological breakthrough compared to none in the sequential combination treatment group (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Sequential combination treatment is able to improve sustained biochemical response rates and prevent the emergence of lamivudine-resistant mutants in patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B.