Long-term effect of obstructive sleep apnea management on blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension: The SARAH study.

There is a close relationship between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and resistant hypertension (RH). However, studies assessing the long-term effect of diagnosing and treating OSA on blood pressure (BP) control in these patients are lacking. To address this gap, we recruited 478 RH patients from hypertension units and followed them prospectively after they were screened for OSA through a sleep study. By performing 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (24-h ABPM) annually, the effect of OSA management was assessed. The patients had a median age of 64 [57.2; 69.0] years, 67% were males, and most were nonsleepy, with a median apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of 15.8 [7.9; 30.7] events/hour. The median follow-up time was 3.01 [2.93; 3.12] years. At baseline, severe OSA was associated with uncontrolled BP, nocturnal hypertension, and a nondipper circadian BP pattern. Moreover, these patients had higher BP values during follow-up than did patients in the other groups. However, among patients with moderate and severe OSA, the management of sleep-disordered breathing, including the implementation of CPAP treatment, was associated with a reduction in 24-h ABPM parameters, especially nighttime BP values, at the one-year follow-up. These benefits were attenuated over time, and only subjects with severe OSA maintained an ABPM nighttime reduction at three years. Furthermore, clinical variables such as uncontrolled BP, sex and age showed a predictive value for the BP response at one year of follow-up. In conclusion, a favorable long-term decrease in BP was detected by diagnosing and treating OSA in a cohort of RH patients from hypertension units, but over time, this decrease was only partially maintained in severe-OSA patients (NCT03002558).

Comorbid association of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and thrombotic primary antiphospholipid syndrome (tPAPS): A more severe phenotype?

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the frequency of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in patients with thrombotic primary antiphospholipid syndrome (tPAPS), to investigate the performance of screening tools for OSA in this scenario and to compare clinical/laboratorial differences in tPAPS patients with and without OSA. METHODS: We consecutively enrolled patients with tPAPS to undergo sleep studies using a portable monitor. OSA was defined as apnea-hypopnea index ≥15 events/h. Frequency of OSA in tPAPS was evaluated and compared with age-, gender-, and BMI-matched controls (1:3 ratio) from the Estudo Longitudinal de Saúde do Adulto (ELSA-Brasil). Next, we tested the performance of three different screening tools for assessing OSA in patients with tPAPS. Finally, patients with tPAPS were stratified according to OSA status comparing their clinical and laboratory characteristics (including damage burden measured by Damage Index for Antiphospholipid Syndrome [DIAPS] and biomarkers associated with thrombosis) using standard statistical procedures. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were included for analysis (females: 82.7%; mean age: 48 ± 14 years; body-mass index: 31.1 ± 6.5 Kg/m2; 25% with moderate-severe OSA). When compared to matched controls from ELSA-Brasil (n = 115), there was no significant differences in the frequencies of OSA (tPAPS: 12/42 [28.6%] vs. controls: 35/115 [30.4%], p = 0.821). Among screening tools, NoSAS had the highest area under ROC curve (AUC 0.806, CI 95% 0.672-0.939, p = 0.001), followed by STOP-Bang (AUC 0.772, CI 95% 0.607-0.938, p = 0.004). Patients with comorbid tPAPS and OSA presented higher levels of von Willebrand factor (vWF) (median 38.9 vs. 32.6, p = 0.038) and DIAPS (median 5 vs. 2, p = 0.020), when compared to those without OSA. OSA remained statistically associated with higher DIAPS, even after controlling for age, disease duration and BMI. CONCLUSION: OSA is common in patients with tPAPS, with rates comparable to a non-referred population. Both NoSAS and STOP-Bang scores seems to be useful for screening OSA in these patients. Patients with tPAPS+OSA had higher damage burden and higher levels of vWF, which might suggest a more severe phenotype of tPAPS in this scenario.

Obstructive sleep apnea and hypertension-mediated organ damage in nonresistant and resistant hypertension.

The potential role of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD) may be influenced by the presence of resistant hypertension (RH). Herein, we enrolled patients with hypertension from a tertiary center for clinical evaluation and performed a sleep study to identify OSA (apnea-hypopnea index ≥15 events/h) and a blinded analysis of four standard HMOD parameters (left ventricular hypertrophy [LVH], increased arterial stiffness [≥10 m/s], presence of retinopathy, and nephropathy). RH was diagnosed based on uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) (≥140/90 mmHg) despite concurrent use of at least three antihypertensive drug classes or controlled BP with concurrent use of ≥4 antihypertensive drug classes at optimal doses. To avoid the white-coat effect, ambulatory BP monitoring was performed to confirm RH diagnosis. One-hundred patients were included in the analysis (mean age: 54 ± 8 years, 65% females, body mass index: 30.4 ± 4.5 kg/m²). OSA was detected in 52% of patients. Among patients with non-RH (n = 53), the presence of OSA (52.8%) was not associated with an increased frequency of HMOD. Conversely, among patients with RH, OSA (51.1%) was associated with a higher incidence of LVH (RH-OSA,61%; RH + OSA,87%; p = 0.049). Logistic regression analysis using the total sample revealed that RH (OR:7.89; 95% CI:2.18-28.52; p = 0.002), systolic BP (OR:1.04; 95% CI:1.00-1.07; p = 0.042) and OSA (OR:4.31; 95% CI:1.14-16.34; p = 0.032) were independently associated with LVH. No significant association was observed between OSA and arterial stiffness, retinopathy, or nephropathy. In conclusion, OSA is independently associated with LVH in RH, suggesting a potential role of OSA in RH prognosis.

COVID-19: Understanding the impact of anti-hypertensive drugs and hydroxychloroquine on the ACE1 and ACE2 in lung and adipose tissue in SHR and WKY rats.

Hypertensive individuals taking anti-hypertensive drugs from renin-angiotensin system inhibitors may exhibit a more severe evolution of the disease when contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19 disease) due to potential increases in ACE2 expression. The study investigated ACE1 and ACE2 axes and hydroxychloroquine in the lungs and adipose tissue of male and female normotensive Wistar Kyoto (WKY) and spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs). SHRs were treated with losartan (10 mg/kg/day) or captopril (10 mg/kg/day) for 14 days or 7 days with hydroxychloroquine (200 mg/kg/day) in drinking water. WKY rats were also treated for 7 days with hydroxychloroquine. Blood pressure (BP), protein, and mRNA expression of ACE1 and ACE2 were analyzed in serum, adipose, and lung tissues. Losartan and captopril reduced BP in both sexes in SHR, whereas hydroxychloroquine increased BP in WKY rats. Losartan reduced ACE2 in serum and lungs in both sexes and in adipose tissue of male SHRs. Captopril decreased ACE2 protein in the lung of females and in adipose tissue in both sexes of SHRs. Hydroxychloroquine decreased ACE1 and ACE2 proteins in the lungs in both sexes and adipose tissue in male SHRs. In female WKY rats, ACE2 protein was lower only in the lungs and adipose tissue. Losartan effectively inhibited ACE2 in male and captopril in female SHRs. Hydroxychloroquine inhibited ACE2 in male SHRs and female WKY rats. These results further our understanding of the ACE2 mechanism in patients under renin-angiotensin anti-hypertensive therapy and in many trials using hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 treatment and potential sex differences in response to drug treatment.

Effects of long term device-guided slow breathing on sympathetic nervous activity in hypertensive patients: a randomized open-label clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Device-guided slow breathing (DGB) is indicated as nonpharmacological treatment for hypertension. The sympathetic nerve activity (SNA) reduction may be one of the mechanisms involved in blood pressure (BP) decrease. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term use of DGB in BP and SNA. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Hypertensive patients were randomized to listen music (Control Group-CG) or DGB (aim to reduce respiratory rate to less than 10 breaths/minute during 15 minutes/day for 8 weeks). Before and after intervention ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), catecholamines and muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) by microneurography were performed. RESULTS: 17 volunteers in the DGB and 15 in the CG completed the study. There was no change in office BP before and after intervention in both groups. There was a reduction in systolic and diastolic BP in the awake period by ABPM only in the CG (131 ± 10/92 ± 9 vs 128 ± 10/88 ± 8mmHg, p < 0.05). In relation to SNA, no difference in catecholamines was observed. In the volunteers who had a microneurography record, there was no change the MSNA (bursts/minute): DGB (17(15-28) vs 19(13-22), p = 0.08) and CG (22(17-23) vs 22(18-24), p = 0.52). CONCLUSION: Long-term DGB did not reduce BP, catecholamines levels or MSNA in hypertensive patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01390727.

Home blood pressure monitoring in blood pressure control among haemodialysis patients: an open randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: It is not known if the adjustment of antihypertensive therapy based on home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) can improve blood pressure (BP) control among haemodialysis patients. METHODS: This is an open randomized clinical trial. Hypertensive patients on haemodialysis were randomized to have the antihypertensive therapy adjusted based on predialysis BP measurements or HBPM. Before and after 6 months of follow-up, patients were submitted to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for 24 h, HBPM during 1 week and echocardiogram. RESULTS: A total of 34 and 31 patients completed the study in the HBPM and predialysis BP groups, respectively. At the end of study, the systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure during the interdialytic period measured by ABPM were significantly lower in the HBPM group in relation to the predialysis BP group (mean 24-h BP: 135 +/- 12 mmHg/76 +/- 7 mmHg versus 147 +/- 15 mmHg/79 +/- 8 mmHg; P < 0.05). In the HBPM analysis, the HBPM group showed a significant reduction only in SBP compared to the predialysis BP group (weekly mean: 144 +/- 21 mmHg versus 154 +/- 22 mmHg; P < 0.05). There were no differences between the HBPM and predialysis BP groups in relation to the left ventricular mass index at the end of the study (108 +/- 35 g/m(2) versus 110 +/- 33 g/m(2); P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Decision making based on HBPM among haemodialysis patients has led to a better BP control during the interdialytic period in comparison with predialysis BP measurements. HBPM may be a useful adjuvant instrument for blood pressure control among haemodialysis patients.