A novel index for measuring the impact of devices on hypertension.

A key limitation in assessing the therapeutic impact of non-pharmacological approaches to treating hypertension is the method of reporting outcomes. Reducing the medications required to achieve the same blood pressure may be reported separately to a reduction in the blood pressure without change in medication, and thus lessen the reported beneficial impact of treatment. This study aims to derive a novel scoring system to gauge the therapeutic impact of non-drug treatment of hypertension by utilising a combination of excessive blood pressure and the number of anti-hypertensives into a combined score-the hypertensive index (HTi). The hypertensive index was empirically derived based on the systolic blood pressure and number of antihypertensive drugs, and applied retrospectively to a cohort undergoing intervention for renovascular hypertension. Subgroup and receiver operating characteristic analyses were used to compare the HTi to traditional methods of reporting outcomes. Following intervention (99 patients), 46% had improvement in both medication load and blood pressure, 29% had benefit in blood pressure without reduction in medication load, 15% had reduction in medication load without significant change in blood pressure and 9% showed no benefit in either parameter. The HTi was superior in detecting benefit from intervention compared with measuring blood pressure or medication load alone (AUC 0.94 vs 0.85;0.84). The hypertensive index may be a more sensitive marker of treatment effect than assessing blood pressure measurements alone. The use of such scoring systems in future trial design may allow more accurate reporting of the effects of interventions for hypertension.

Grand Rounds at the British Hypertension Society: renal artery stenosis.

Renal artery angioplasty for renovascular hypertension is a controversial subject with considerable data but few certainties. This article is a summary of the Grand Round on Renovascular Hypertension held at the British Hypertension Society Annual Conference in September 2006.

ESC-CHF: guidelines for the aspirational and the practical.

The recently published guidelines by the European Society of Cardiology on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure are well worth reading, include important new recommendations and are reviewed here.

Clinical assessment alone will not benefit patients with coronary heart disease: failure to achieve cholesterol targets in 12,045 patients--the Healthwise II study.

Healthwise II, a nurse-led audit programme in primary care during 1999-2002, assessed the uptake of secondary preventative measures for coronary heart disease (CHD). Risk factors, cardiovascular medications and blood cholesterol were recorded; 'at risk' patients were invited for a review after 6 months. Of 17,570 patients assessed, CHD was clinically present in 12,045 (69%); in these, aspirin usage was high (78%) but fewer patients were on a beta-blocker (40%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (27%) or statin (49%). Blood pressure (BP) was controlled (<140/90) in only 41% of patients. Total cholesterol was >5 mmol/l in 49% of all CHD patients, half of whom were taking a statin. In the statin users, total cholesterol was uncontrolled (>5 mmol/l) in 38%. At follow-up, BP control remained at 42%, statin use increased to 57% and cholesterol remained elevated in 46%. Simple assessment in an audit programme fails to trigger change, and risk-factor modification for CHD remains inadequate.