Hypertension and atrial fibrillation: the clinical impact of hypertension on perioperative outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation and its optimal control for the prevention of recurrence.

Hypertension (HTN) is one of the major risk factors for developing atrial fibrillation (AF), and it has been estimated that approximately 70% of hypertensive patients are at risk of developing AF. On the other hand, 60-80% of AF patients have HTN. These two diseases share many risk factors such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, alcohol consumption, and sleep apnea syndrome during their onset and disease progression. The mutual presence of these diseases has the potential to create a negative spiral, exacerbating each other's impact and ultimately leading to cardiovascular events such as heart failure and cerebrovascular disorders, thereby increasing mortality rates. With regard to the treatment of HTN, the variety of antihypertensive drugs and treatment options have significantly increased. Alongside the widespread adoption of antihypertensive therapy, a certain level of efficacy has been recognized in suppressing the incidence of new-onset AF. Catheter ablation is an established and effective treatment for AF. However, a notable recurrence rate persists. In recent years, management of these multiple risk factors has been recognized to be essential for suppressing AF recurrence, and recent guidelines for AF underscore the significance of proactively managing these risks before treatment. Notably, effective HTN management assumes paramount importance given its impact on the morbidity of AF patients. This review summarizes the correlation between HTN control before and after ablation and the risk of AF recurrence. The focus is on elucidating the pathophysiological background and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Assessment of blood pressure variability: characteristics and comparison of blood pressure measurement methods.

Previous studies have reported that blood pressure variability (BPV) is associated with the risk of cardiovascular events independent of blood pressure (BP) levels. While there is little evidence from intervention trials examining whether suppressing BPV is useful in preventing cardiovascular disease, it is suggested that detection of abnormally elevated BPV may be useful in reducing cardiovascular events adding by complementing management of appropriate BP levels. Cuffless BP devices can assess beat-to-beat BPV. Although cuffless BP monitoring devices have measurement accuracy issues that need to be resolved, this is an area of research where the evidence is accumulating rapidly, with many publications on beat-to-beat BPV over several decades. Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) can assess 24-hour BPV and nocturnal dipping patterns. Day-to-day BPV and visit-to-visit BPV are assessed by self-measured BP monitoring at home and office BP measurement, respectively. 24 h, day-to-day, and visit-to-visit BPV have been reported to be associated with cardiovascular prognosis. Although there have been several studies comparing whether ABPM and self-measured BP monitoring at home is the superior measurement method of BPV, no strong evidence has been accumulated that indicates whether ABPM or self-measured home BP is superior. ABPM and self-measured BP monitoring have their own advantages and complement each other in the assessment of BPV.

Relationships of Office, Ambulatory, and Self-measured Blood Pressure With Cardiac, Renal, and Atherosclerotic Biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies with several limitations have comparatively analyzed the relationship between ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and self-measured BP and biomarkers of organ damage. This study extends this line of research by examining the relationship between ambulatory and self-measured BP and cardiac, renal, and atherosclerotic biomarkers in outpatients at cardiovascular risk. METHODS: In 1,440 practice outpatients who underwent office, ambulatory, and self-measured BP monitoring, we assessed the relationships of each BP with organ damage biomarkers including b-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), echocardiographic left ventricular mass index (LVMI), urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR), and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV). RESULTS: In the comparison of correlation, self-measured systolic BP (SBP) was more strongly correlated to log-transformed (Ln) BNP (n = 1,435; r = 0.123 vs. r = -0.093, P < 0.001), LVMI (n = 1,278; r = 0.223 vs. r = 0.094, P < 0.001), Ln-UACR (n = 1,435; r = 0.244 vs. r = 0.154, P = 0.010), and baPWV (n = 1,360; r = 0.327 vs. r = 0.115, P < 0.001) than daytime ambulatory SBP. In the linear regression models including office, ambulatory, and self-measured SBP, only self-measured SBP was significantly related to Ln-BNP (P = 0.016) and LVMI (P < 0.001). In the logistic regression models for the top quartile of LVMI, adding self-measured SBP improved the model predictability (P = 0.027), but adding daytime ambulatory SBP did not. However, adding daytime ambulatory SBP improved the model predictability in the logistic model for the top quartile of baPWV including office and self-measured SBP (P = 0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings suggested that self-measured BP was associated with cardiac biomarkers independent of ambulatory BP.

Novel Pulse Waveform Index by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiac Function: A Pilot Study.

Background: A simple ambulatory measure of cardiac function could be helpful for monitoring heart failure patients. Objectives: The purpose of this paper was to determine whether a novel pulse waveform analysis using data obtained by our developed multisensor-ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device, the 'Sf/Am' ratio, is associated with echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods: Multisensor-ABPM was conducted twice at baseline in 20 heart failure (HF) patients with HF-reduced LVEF or HF-preserved LVEF (median age 66 years, male 65%) and over a 6- to 12-month follow-up after patient-tailored treatment. We assessed the changes in the pulse waveform index Sf/Am and LVEF that occurred between the baseline and follow-up. The Sf/Am consists of the area of the ejection part in the square forward wave (Sf) and the amplitude of the measured wave (Am). We divided the patients into the recovered (n = 11) and not-recovered (n = 9) groups defined by a ≥10% increase in LVEF. Results: Although the ambulatory BP levels and variabilities did not change in either group, the Sf/Am increased significantly in the recovered group (baseline 21.4 ± 4.5; follow-up, 25.6 ± 3.7, P = 0.004). The not-recovered group showed no difference between the baseline and follow-up. The follow-up/baseline Sf/Am ratio was significantly associated with the LVEF ratio (r = 0.469, P = 0.037). The Sf/Am was significantly correlated with the LVEF in overall measurements (n = 40, r = 0.491, P = 0.001). Conclusions: These results demonstrated that a novel noninvasive pulse waveform index, the Sf/Am measured by multisensor-ABPM is associated with LVEF. The Sf/Am may be useful for estimating cardiac function.

2023 update and perspectives.

Total 276 manuscripts were published in Hypertension Research in 2022. Here our editorial members picked up the excellent papers, summarized the current topics from the published papers and discussed future perspectives in the sixteen fields. We hope you enjoy our special feature, 2023 update and perspectives in Hypertension Research.

Polypill Therapy for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Combination Medication Therapy for Hypertension Management.

Although various guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention have been established, the optimal drug therapy is often not implemented due to poor medication adherence and the clinical inertia of healthcare practitioners. Polypill strategies are one solution to this problem. Previous studies have established the usefulness of polypills, i.e., combination tablets including three or more medications, for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. For this purpose, the polypills generally contain an antiplatelet medication, an antihypertensive medication, and a statin. For the specific management of hypertension, combination therapy including more than two classes of antihypertensive medications is recommended by most international guidelines. Combination tablets including two classes of antihypertensive medications, such as renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs] and angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) and Ca-channel blockers or thiazide diuretics, have been reported to be useful for cardiovascular disease prevention and lowering blood pressure (BP) levels. The use of RAS inhibitors is recommended for a wide range of complications, including diabetes, chronic heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. The combination of an RAS inhibitor and diuretic or Ca-channel blocker is thus recommended for the management of hypertension. Finally, we expect that novel medications such as angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), which have a more diverse range of effects in hypertension, heart failure, or diabetes, may be a solution to the problem of polypharmacy. Evidence is accumulating on the benefits of polypill strategies in cardiovascular disease prevention. Combination tablets are also effective for the treatment of hypertension.

Comparison of Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Variability for Cardiovascular Prognosis and Biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Although blood pressure variability (BPV) is reported to be associated with cardiovascular prognoses, it has not been established whether ambulatory BPV (ABPV; ie, short-term 24-hour BPV) or home BPV (HBPV; day-to-day BPV) is a superior clinical marker. METHODS: We analyzed the associations of ABPV and HBPV with cardiovascular prognoses and biomarkers in 1314 hypertensive outpatients who underwent both home and ambulatory BP measurements in the J-HOP study (Japan Morning-Surge Home Blood Pressure). BPV was evaluated by the SD, coefficient of variation, and average real variability of the patients' 24-hour ambulatory and home systolic BP values. RESULTS: During the median 7.0-year follow-up, 109 cardiovascular events occurred. All SD, coefficient of variation, and average real variability values of the HBPV were significantly associated with cardiovascular risk even after adjusting by average 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP and each ABPV value: 1 SD of hazard ratio (95% CI) for the SD, 1.36 (1.14-1.63); coefficient of variation, 1.38 (1.16-1.66); and average real variability 1.29 (1.10-1.51) of HBPV. The ABPV parameters did not exhibit comparable relationships. The cardiovascular risk spline curves showed a trend toward increased risks with increasing HBPV parameters. There were no differences between ABPV and HBPV in the relationships with B-type natriuretic peptide and the urine albumin-creatine ratio. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis of ambulatory and home BP monitoring values in individuals with hypertension, ABPV was not significantly associated with cardiovascular prognosis adjusted by average BP level, and HBPV was suggested to have modest superiority in predicting cardiovascular prognosis compared with ABPV.