Global blood pressure screening during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from the May Measurement Month 2021 campaign.

BACKGROUND: Raised blood pressure (BP) remains the biggest risk factor contributing to the global burden of disease and mortality, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. May Measurement Month (MMM), an annual global screening campaign aims to highlight the importance of BP measurement by evaluating global awareness, treatment and control rates among adults with hypertension. In 2021, we assessed the global burden of these rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Screening sites were set up in 54 countries between May and November 2021 and screenees were recruited by convenience sampling. Three sitting BPs were measured, and a questionnaire completed including demographic, lifestyle and clinical data. Hypertension was defined as a systolic BP at least 140 mmHg and/or a diastolic BP at least 90 mmHg (using the mean of the second and third readings) or taking antihypertensive medication. Multiple imputation was used to impute the average BP when readings were missing. RESULTS: Of the 642 057 screenees, 225 882 (35.2%) were classified as hypertensive, of whom 56.8% were aware, and 50.3% were on antihypertensive medication. Of those on treatment, 53.9% had controlled BP (<140/90 mmHg). Awareness, treatment and control rates were lower than those reported in MMM campaigns before the COVID-19 pandemic. Minimal changes were apparent among those testing positive for, or being vaccinated against COVID-19. Of those on antihypertensive medication, 94.7% reported no change in their treatment because of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The high yield of untreated or inadequately treated hypertension in MMM 2021 confirms the need for systematic BP screening where it does not currently exist.

Implications of ACC/AHA Versus ESC/EAS LDL-C Recommendations for Residual Risk Reduction in ASCVD: A Simulation Study From DA VINCI.

PURPOSE: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recommendations differ between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (< 70 vs. < 55 mg/dl, respectively). In the DA VINCI study, residual cardiovascular risk was predicted in ASCVD patients. The extent to which relative and absolute risk might be lowered by achieving ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommended approaches was simulated. METHODS: DA VINCI was a cross-sectional observational study of patients prescribed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) across 18 European countries. Ten-year cardiovascular risk (CVR) was predicted among ASCVD patients receiving stabilized LLT. For patients with LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dl, the absolute LDL-C reduction required to achieve an LDL-C of < 70 or < 55 mg/dl (LDL-C of 69 or 54 mg/dl, respectively) was calculated. Relative and absolute risk reductions (RRRs and ARRs) were simulated. RESULTS: Of the 2039 patients, 61% did not achieve LDL-C < 70 mg/dl. For patients with LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dl, median (interquartile range) baseline LDL-C and 10-year CVR were 93 (81-115) mg/dl and 32% (25-43%), respectively. Median LDL-C reductions of 24 (12-46) and 39 (27-91) mg/dl were needed to achieve an LDL-C of 69 and 54 mg/dl, respectively. Attaining ACC/AHA or ESC/EAS goals resulted in simulated RRRs of 14% (7-25%) and 22% (15-32%), respectively, and ARRs of 4% (2-7%) and 6% (4-9%), respectively. CONCLUSION: In ASCVD patients, achieving ESC/EAS LDL-C goals could result in a 2% additional ARR over 10 years versus the ACC/AHA approach.

EU-Wide Cross-Sectional Observational Study of Lipid-Modifying Therapy Use in Secondary and Primary Care: the DA VINCI study.

AIMS: To provide contemporary data on the implementation of European guideline recommendations for lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) across different settings and populations and how this impacts low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement. METHODS AND RESULTS: An 18 country, cross-sectional, observational study of patients prescribed LLT for primary or secondary prevention in primary or secondary care across Europe. Between June 2017 and November 2018, data were collected at a single visit, including LLT in the preceding 12 months and most recent LDL-C. Primary outcome was the achievement of risk-based 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C goal while receiving stabilized LLT; 2019 goal achievement was also assessed. Overall, 5888 patients (3000 primary and 2888 secondary prevention patients) were enrolled; 54% [95% confidence interval (CI) 52-56] achieved their risk-based 2016 goal and 33% (95% CI 32-35) achieved their risk-based 2019 goal. High-intensity statin monotherapy was used in 20% and 38% of very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Corresponding 2016 goal attainment was 22% and 45% (17% and 22% for 2019 goals) for very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Use of moderate-high-intensity statins in combination with ezetimibe (9%), or any LLT with PCSK9 inhibitors (1%), was low; corresponding 2016 and 2019 goal attainment was 53% and 20% (ezetimibe combination), and 67% and 58% (PCSK9i combination). CONCLUSION: Gaps between clinical guidelines and clinical practice for lipid management across Europe persist, which will be exacerbated by the 2019 guidelines. Even with optimized statins, greater utilization of non-statin LLT is likely needed to reduce these gaps for patients at highest risk.

An evaluation of the effect of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor on the growth rate of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: a randomised placebo-controlled trial (AARDVARK).

BACKGROUND: Although data are inconsistent, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) have been associated with a reduced incidence of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture in analysis of administrative databases. OBJECTIVES: (1) To investigate whether or not the ACE-I perindopril (Coversyl arginine, Servier) reduces small AAA growth rate and (2) to evaluate blood pressure (BP)-independent effects of perindopril on small AAA growth and to compare the repeatability of measurement of internal and external aneurysm diameters. DESIGN: A three-arm, multicentre, single-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Fourteen hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: Men or women aged ≥ 55 years with an AAA of 3.0-5.4 cm in diameter by internal or external measurement according to ultrasonography and who met the trial eligibility criteria. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to receive 10 mg of perindopril arginine daily, 5 mg of the calcium channel blocker amlodipine daily or placebo daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was AAA diameter growth using external measurements in the longitudinal plane, which in-trial studies suggested was the preferred measure. Secondary outcome measures included AAA rupture, AAA repair, modelling of the time taken for the AAA to reach the threshold for intervention (5.5 cm) or referral for surgery, tolerance of study medication (measured by compliance, adverse events and quality of life) and a comparison of the repeatability of measures of internal and external AAA diameter. Patients were followed up every 3-6 months over 2 years. RESULTS: In total, 227 patients were recruited and randomised into the three groups, which were generally well matched at baseline. Multilevel modelling was used to determine the maximum likelihood estimates for AAA diameter growth. No significant differences in the estimates of annual growth were apparent [1.68 (standard error 0.02) mm, 1.77 (0.02) mm and 1.81 (0.02) mm in the placebo, perindopril and amlodipine groups, respectively]. Similarly, no significant differences in the slopes of modelled growth over time were apparent between perindopril and placebo (p = 0.78) or between perindopril and amlodipine (p = 0.89). The results were essentially unaffected by adjustment for potential confounders. Compliance, measured by pill counts, was good throughout (> 80% at all visit time points). There were no significant in-trial safety concerns. Six patients withdrew because of adverse events attributed to the study medications (n = 2 perindopril, n = 4 amlodipine). No patients ruptured their AAA and 27 underwent elective surgery during the trial (n = 9 placebo, n = 10 perindopril, n = 8 amlodipine). CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to demonstrate a significant impact of perindopril compared with placebo or amlodipine on small AAA growth over a 2-year period. Furthermore, there were no differences in the times to reach a diameter of 5.5 cm or undergo surgery among the three groups. Perindopril and amlodipine were well tolerated by this population. External AAA measurements were found to be more repeatable than internal measurements. The observed AAA growth measurement variability was greater than that expected pre trial. This, combined with slower than expected mean growth rates, resulted in our having limited power to detect small differences between growth rates and hence this adds uncertainty to the interpretation of the results. Several further analyses are planned including a multivariate analysis of determinants of AAA growth, an evaluation of the possible differential effect of perindopril on fast AAA growth and an investigation into the roles of central BP and BP variability on AAA growth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN51383267. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The NIHR Biomedical Research Centre based at Imperial College NHS Trust supported the trial. Servier provided perindopril at no charge.

An evaluation of the effect of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor on the growth rate of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: a randomized placebo-controlled trial (AARDVARK).

AIMS: The AARDVARK (Aortic Aneurysmal Regression of Dilation: Value of ACE-Inhibition on RisK) trial investigated whether ACE-inhibition reduces small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) growth rate, independent of blood pressure (BP) lowering. METHODS AND RESULTS: A three-arm, multi-centre, single-blind, and randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN51383267) was conducted in 14 hospitals in England. Subjects aged ≥55 years with AAA diameter 3.0-5.4 cm were randomized 1:1:1 to receive perindopril arginine 10 mg, or amlodipine 5 mg, or placebo and followed 3-6 monthly over 2 years. The primary outcome was aneurysm growth rate (based on external antero-posterior ultrasound measurements in the longitudinal plane), determined by multi-level modelling to provide maximum likelihood estimates. Two hundred and twenty-four subjects were randomized (2011-2013) to placebo (n = 79), perindopril (n = 73), or amlodipine (n = 72). Mean (SD) changes in mid-trial systolic BP (12 months) were 0.5 (14.3) mmHg, P = 0.78 compared with baseline, -9.5 (13.1) mmHg (P < 0.001), and -6.7 (12.0) mmHg (P < 0.001), respectively. No significant differences in the modelled annual growth rates were apparent [1.68 mm (SE 0.2), 1.77 mm (0.2), and 1.81 mm (0.2), respectively]. The estimated difference in annual growth between the perindopril and placebo groups was 0.08 mm (CI -0.50, 0.65). Similar numbers of AAAs in each group reached 5.5 cm diameter and/or underwent elective surgery: 11 receiving placebo, 10 perindopril, and 11 amlodipine. CONCLUSION: Small AAA growth rates were lower than anticipated, but there was no significant impact of perindopril compared with placebo or placebo and amlodipine, combined despite more effective BP lowering.