Clinical recommendations for high altitude exposure of individuals with pre-existing cardiovascular conditions: A joint statement by the European Society of Cardiology, the Council on Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology, the European Society of Hypertension, the International Society of Mountain Medicine, the Italian Society of Hypertension and the Italian Society of Mountain Medicine.

Take home figureAdapted from Bärtsch and Gibbs2 Physiological response to hypoxia. Life-sustaining oxygen delivery, in spite of a reduction in the partial pressure of inhaled oxygen between 25% and 60% (respectively at 2500 m and 8000 m), is ensured by an increase in pulmonary ventilation, an increase in cardiac output by increasing heart rate, changes in vascular tone, as well as an increase in haemoglobin concentration. BP, blood pressure; HR, heart rate; PaCO2, partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide.

2018 Practice Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension.

These practice guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension are a concise summary of the more extensive ones prepared by the Task Force jointly appointed by the European Society of Hypertension and the European Society of Cardiology. These guidelines have been prepared on the basis of the best available evidence on all issues deserving recommendations; their role must be educational and not prescriptive or coercive for the management of individual subjects who may differ widely in their personal, medical and cultural characteristics. The members of the Task Force have participated independently in the preparation of these guidelines, drawing on their academic and clinical experience and by objective examination and interpretation of all available literature. A disclosure of their potential conflict of interest is reported on the websites of the ESH and the ESC.

Hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias: a consensus document from the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and ESC Council on Hypertension, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE).

Hypertension is a common cardiovascular risk factor leading to heart failure (HF), coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease and chronic renal insufficiency. Hypertensive heart disease can manifest as many cardiac arrhythmias, most commonly being atrial fibrillation (AF). Both supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias may occur in hypertensive patients, especially in those with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) or HF. Also, some of the antihypertensive drugs commonly used to reduce blood pressure, such as thiazide diuretics, may result in electrolyte abnormalities (e.g. hypokalaemia, hypomagnesemia), further contributing to arrhythmias, whereas effective control of blood pressure may prevent the development of the arrhythmias such as AF. In recognizing this close relationship between hypertension and arrhythmias, the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Council on Hypertension convened a Task Force, with representation from the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE), with the remit to comprehensively review the available evidence to publish a joint consensus document on hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias, and to provide up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice. The ultimate judgment regarding care of a particular patient must be made by the healthcare provider and the patient in light of all of the circumstances presented by that patient.

Emerging risk factors and the dose-response relationship between physical activity and lone atrial fibrillation: a prospective case-control study.

AIMS: The role of high-intensity exercise and other emerging risk factors in lone atrial fibrillation (Ln-AF) epidemiology is still under debate. The aim of this study was to analyse the contribution of each of the emerging risk factors and the impact of physical activity dose in patients with Ln-AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with Ln-AF and age- and sex-matched healthy controls were included in a 2:1 prospective case-control study. We obtained clinical and anthropometric data transthoracic echocardiography, lifetime physical activity questionnaire, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, Berlin questionnaire score, and, in patients at high risk for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) syndrome, a polysomnography. A total of 115 cases and 57 controls were enrolled. Conditional logistic regression analysis associated height [odds ratio (OR) 1.06 [1.01-1.11]], waist circumference (OR 1.06 [1.02-1.11]), OSA (OR 5.04 [1.44-17.45]), and 2000 or more hours of cumulative high-intensity endurance training to a higher AF risk. Our data indicated a U-shaped association between the extent of high-intensity training and AF risk. The risk of AF increased with an accumulated lifetime endurance sport activity ≥ 2,000 h compared with sedentary individuals (OR 3.88 [1.55-9.73]). Nevertheless, a history of <2000 h of high-intensity training protected against AF when compared with sedentary individuals (OR 0.38 [0.12-0.98]). CONCLUSION: A history of ≥ 2,000 h of vigorous endurance training, tall stature, abdominal obesity, and OSA are frequently encountered as risk factors in patients with Ln-AF. Fewer than 2000 total hours of high-intensity endurance training associates with reduced Ln-AF risk.

The natural history of cardiovascular risk factors in health professionals: 20-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The knowledge of the presence and evolution of cardiovascular risk factors in young people may significantly contribute to actions to modify the natural history of these risks and prevent the onset of cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVES: To assess the presence and evolution of cardiovascular risk factors in health professionals over a 20-year period. METHODS: A group of individuals was evaluated when they first started graduate programs in medicine, nursing, nutrition, dentistry, and pharmacy, and 20 years later. Data obtained in the two phases were compared. Questionnaires about hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, family history of early-onset cardiovascular disease, smoking, alcohol consumption, and sedentary lifestyle were administered. Cholesterol, blood glucose, blood pressure, weight, height, and body mass index (BMI) were measured. RESULTS: Of the 281 individuals (62.9 % women; mean age 19.7 years) initially analyzed, 215 (59.07 % women; mean age 39.8 years) were analyzed 20 years later. An increase in mean values of systolic (111.6 vs 118.7 mmHg- p < 0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (71 vs 77.1 mmHg - p < 0.001), cholesterol (150.1 vs 182.4 mg/dL - p < 0.001), blood glucose (74.3 vs 81.4 mg/dL - p < 0.001) and BMI (20.7 vs 23.7 kg/m(2) - p = 0.017) was observed. Despite the decrease of sedentarism (50.2 vs 38.1 % - p = 0.015), the prevalence of hypertension (4.6 vs 18.6 % - p < 0.001), excessive weight (8.2 vs 32.1 % - p < 0.001), hypercholesterolemia (7.8 vs 24.2 % - p < 0.001), and alcohol consumption (32.7 vs 34.9 % - p = 0.037) increased. There was no change in the prevalence of smoking. CONCLUSION: Health professionals presented an increase in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, blood glucose, body mass index, and cholesterol over the 20-year study period. Regarding the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, increased blood pressure, overweight, hypercholesterolemia and alcohol consumption, and a decrease in sedentary lifestyle were observed.

[Differences between the 2013 and 2014 hypertension guidelines.: Position of the Central American and Caribbean Society for Hypertension and Cardiovascular Prevention]. / Divergencias entre guías de 2013 y 2014 de la hipertensión arterial.: Posición de la Sociedad Centroamericana y del Caribe de Hipertensión y Prevención Cardiovascular¹.

Between the end of 2013 and the beginning of 2014 the most internationally influential hypertension guidelines were published. Although there are no major differences between them, there are discrepancies that can have an impact on treatment and prognosis for individuals with hypertension. This article analyzes the main controversial elements in the guides and presents the recommendations of the Sociedad Centroamericana y del Caribe de Hipertensión y Prevención Cardiovascular (Caribbean Society for Hypertension and Cardiovascular Prevention). The main differences are found a) in the categorization of prehypertension, b) in the use of global cardiovascular risk in the decision to begin antihypertensive treatment, c) in the validity of beta-blockers as first-line drugs in treating uncomplicated hypertension, and d) the increase in the therapeutic goal of maintaining values between < 140/90 and < 150/90 mmHg in patients over 60 years of age with no history of diabetes or chronic kidney disease. All the factors in favor of and against accepting each of these four controversial criteria are analyzed critically and the observations made by the Society are included. The conclusion is that there are pros and cons for all controversial elements in the hypertension guides. However, the weight of the evidence and clinical judgment favor subdividing prehypertension into stages I and II, seeking a therapeutic goal of maintaining systolic blood pressure below 140 mmHg in all the hypertensive patients under 80 years of age, retaining beta-blockers as first-line drugs in uncomplicated hypertension, and not delaying the start of drug treatment for hypertension stage I with low global cardiovascular risk. Finally, seven recommendations by the Society based on the analysis are included.

Primary care referrals of patients with potentially serious diseases to the emergency department or a quick diagnosis unit: a cross-sectional retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: In Spain, primary healthcare (PHC) referrals for diagnostic procedures are subject to long waiting-times, and physicians and patients often use the emergency department (ED) as a shortcut. We aimed to determine whether patients evaluated at a hospital outpatient quick diagnosis unit (QDU) who were referred to ED from 12 PHC centers could have been directly referred to QDU, thus avoiding ED visits. As a secondary objective, we determined the proportion of QDU patients who might have been evaluated in a less rapid, non-QDU setting. METHODS: We carried out a cross-sectional retrospective cohort study of patients with potentially serious conditions attended by the QDU from December 2007 to December 2012. We established 2 groups of patients: 1) patients referred from PHC to QDU (PHC-QDU group) and 2) patients referred from PHC to ED, then to QDU (PHC-ED-QDU group). Two observers assessed the appropriateness/inappropriateness of each referral using a scoring system. The interobserver agreement was assessed by calculating the kappa index. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the dependent variable 'ED referral'. RESULTS: We evaluated 1186 PHC-QDU and 1004 PHC-ED-QDU patients and estimated that 93.1% of PHC-ED-QDU patients might have been directly referred to QDU. In contrast, 96% of PHC-QDU patients were found to be appropriately referred to QDU first. The agreement for PHC-QDU referrals (PHC-QDU group) was rated as excellent (Ï°=0.81), while it was rated as good for PHC-ED referrals (PHC-ED-QDU group) (Ï°=0.75). The mean waiting-time for the first QDU visit was longer in PHC-QDU (4.8 days) than in PHC-ED-QDU (2.6 days) patients (P=.001). On multivariate analysis, anemia (OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.49-4.55, P<.001), rectorrhagia (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.10-3.77, P=.01) and febrile syndrome (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.33-4.12, P=.002) were independent factors associated with ED referral. Nearly one-fifth of all QDU patients were found who might have been evaluated in a less rapid, non-QDU setting. CONCLUSIONS: Most PHC-ED-QDU patients might have been directly referred to QDU from PHC, avoiding the inconvenience of the ED visit. A stricter definition of QDU evaluation criteria may be needed to improve and hasten PHC referrals.

The Rationale for Using Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in the Management of Hypertension in Colombia: A Narrative Review.

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and the leading cause of death in Colombia. While the rate of hypertension awareness in Colombia is generally high, rates of treatment initiation, adherence, and blood pressure (BP) control are suboptimal. Major international hypertension guidelines recommend starting treatment with a combination of antihypertensive agents, and the use of a single-pill combination (SPC) to maximize adherence. In contrast, Colombian hypertension guidelines recommend starting treatment with diuretic monotherapy in most patients, and only initiating combination therapy in those with BP > 160/100 mmHg. Therefore, the aim of the current narrative review is to examine the rationale for using SPCs to treat hypertension in Colombia, in the context of the major issues for BP control there. There is evidence of widespread therapeutic inertia in hypertension management, particularly in primary care, in Colombia. Moreover, combination therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and long-acting calcium channel blockers, which are internationally recommended as first-line drug therapies, are underutilized there. Adherence to antihypertensive therapy is low in Colombia and may be enhanced by use of SPCs as well as better patient education and follow-up. While there are promising national initiatives to improve BP management, more needs to be done by individual physicians. Antihypertensive SPCs are available on the national essential medicines list and may help to overcome some of the problems with suboptimal adherence, therapeutic inertia, and low rates of BP control that contribute to the high cardiovascular death rate in Colombia.

Estimated impact of guidelines-based initiation of dual antihypertensive therapy on long-term cardiovascular outcomes in 1.1 million individuals.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend initiation of dual combination antihypertensive therapy, preferably single-pill combination (SPC), in most patients with hypertension. Evidence on narrowing gaps in clinical practice relative to guidelines is limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: Monte Carlo simulation was applied to 1.1 million patients qualifying for dual combination therapy from a previously conducted retrospective analysis of clinical practice, hospital statistics, and national statistics in the UK. We provide 10-year Kaplan-Meier event rates for the primary endpoint representing a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), nonfatal heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death. Cox model results from a previously conducted study were utilized to estimate baseline risk, together with evidence on risk reduction from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC) meta-analysis and published evidence on BP-lowering efficacy of antihypertensive therapies. In the overall population, estimated 10-year event rates for the primary endpoint in patients with 100% persistence in monotherapy were 17.0% for irbesartan (I) and 17.6% for ramipril (R). These rates were only modestly better than that observed in clinical practice (17.8%). In patients with 100% persistence in dual therapy, estimated event rates were 13.6% for combinations of Irbesartan + Amlodipine (ARR = 8.7% compared to untreated) and 14.3% for Ramipril + Amlodipine (ARR = 8.0% compared to untreated). The absolute risk of the primary endpoint was reduced by 15.9% in patients with ASCVD and 6.6% in those without ASCVD. Similarly, the absolute risk was reduced by 11.7% in diabetics and 7.8% in those without diabetes. CONCLUSION: This study represents the first to investigate guidelines-based treatment in hypertensive patients and demonstrates the opportunity for considerable risk reduction by ensuring recommended dual therapy in clinical practice, particularly in the form of SPC with high persistence, relative to no treatment or monotherapy.

Ambulatory blood pressure in stroke and cognitive dysfunction.

We have reviewed the most relevant data regarding ABPM and brain damage, with specific reference to first and recurrent stroke, silent structural brain lesions such as lacunar infarcts and white matter lesions, and cognitive impairment. Only two large studies have evaluated the usefulness of ABPM in relation to antihypertensive treatment in primary stroke prevention. In the Syst-Eur trial, drug treatment reduced ABPM and office BP more than placebo in patients with sustained isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). In contrast, in those patients with white-coat hypertension (WCH) changes in ABPM between the treatment groups were not significantly different. Patients with WCH had a lower incidence of stroke (p < 0.05) during follow-up than patients with sustained ISH, suggesting that WCH is a benign condition. In the HYVET trial 50 % of the very elderly patients included with office systolic BP > 160 mmHg had WCH. However, a significant 30 % stroke reduction was observed in treated patients including those with WCH, indicating that WCH may not be a benign condition in the elderly. In the acute stroke setting, where treatment of hypertension is not routinely recommended due to the lack of evidence and the differing results of the very few available trials, ABPM data shows that sustained high BP during the first 24 h after acute stroke is related to the formation of cerebral edema and a poorer functional status. On the other hand, even when nondipping status was initially related to a poorer prognosis, data indicate that patients with very-large nocturnal dipping, the so-called "extreme dippers", are those with the worse outcomes after stroke. The association between different ABPM parameters (circadian pattern, short-term variability) and poorer performance scores in cognitive function tests have been reported, especially in elderly hypertensives. Unfortunately most of these studies were cross-sectional and the associations do not establish causality.

Polypill in cardiovascular disease prevention: recent advances.

Triple therapy with lipid­lowering, antihypertensive, and antiplatelet agents reduces the risk of recurrent cardiovascular fatal and nonfatal events, cardiovascular mortality, and total mortality in secondary prevention. In real life, however, effective implementation of these optimal treatments both in primary and secondary prevention is low, and thus their contribution to cardiovascular prevention is much lower than it could be, based on research data. One of the main barriers to the adequate implementation of these strategies is low adherence to the elevated number of pills, as adherence is adversely affected by the complexity of the prescribed treatment regimen, and can be considerably improved by treatment simplification. This review updates the findings provided by recent epidemiological and clinical studies favoring a polypill­based approach to cardiovascular prevention. The increased prevalence of patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities provides the rationale for a therapeutic strategy based on a combination of drugs against different risk factors in a single pill. Pharmacologic studies have demonstrated that different cardiovascular drugs can be combined in a single pill with no loss of their individual efficacy, and this favors adherence to and persistence of treatment, as well as multiple risk factor control. Recently, a randomized clinical trial SECURE (Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in the Elderly) has shown a significant, 30% reduction in cardiovascular events, and a 33% reduction in cardiovascular death in patients after myocardial infarction treated with a polypill, as compared with usual care, thus supporting the polypill use as an integral part of any cardiovascular prevention strategy.

The use of the CNIC-Polypill in real-life clinical practice: opportunities and challenges in patients at very high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease - expert panel meeting report.

Although the cardiovascular (CV) polypill concept is not new and several guidelines state that a CV polypill should be considered an integral part of a comprehensive CV disease (CVD) prevention strategy, there are still some barriers to its implementation in the real-world setting, mainly in secondary CV prevention. As the CNIC-polypill is the only one approved for secondary CV prevention in patients with atherosclerotic CVD in 27 countries worldwide, a panel of four discussants and 30 participants from 18 countries conveyed in a virtual meeting on April 21, 2022, to discuss key clinical questions regarding the practical use of the CNIC-Polypill and barriers to its implementation.Data presented showed that, although the use of the CV polypill is not explicitly mentioned in the current 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on CVD prevention, it may be used in any patient for secondary CVD prevention tolerating all their components to improve outcomes through different aspects. The favourable results of the Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in the Elderly (SECURE) trial now reinforce this recommendation. The panellists presented algorithms on how to switch from any baseline regimen when starting treatment with the CNIC-polypill in different situations, including patients with hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and a previous CV event; at discharge after a cardiovascular event; in chronic ischemic conditions; and in cases of polypharmacy. The panellists and expert discussants did agree that available studies conducted so far with the CNIC-polypill demonstrate that it is as efficacious as the monocomponents, equipotent drugs, or other therapies; reduces the risk of experiencing recurrent major CV events; improves medication adherence; reduces health care costs and resources compared to patients treated with loose drugs; and the patients prefer it over the multipill strategy.In conclusion, the data presented by the participants provided the evidence behind the use of the CNIC-polypill to help fulfil the goal of encouraging its adoption by physicians.

Conventional office blood pressure measurements and unattended automated office blood pressure compared with home self-measurement and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether automated office blood pressure (BP) (AOBP) measurement is a better method for measuring BP in the office than conventional techniques and an alternative to out-of-office BP measurements: home-self BP (HSBP) or ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 74 patients and compared AOBP with the conventional technique using a mercury sphygmomanometer and with both out-to-office BP measurements: HSBP of 7 days (three measurements in the morning, afternoon, and night) and daytime ABPM. In addition, we compared BP values obtained using HSBP and ABPM to determine their level of agreement. We used ANOVA to compare means, Bland-Altman, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for concordance. RESULTS: BP values obtained by the two office methods were similar: conventional 147.2/85.0 mmHg and AOBP 146.0/85.5 mmHg ( P > 0.05) with good agreement (ICC 0.85). The mean SBP differences between AOBP and HSBP ( P < 0.001) and between AOBP and ABPM ( P < 0.001) were 8.6/13.0 mmHg with limits of agreement of -21.2 to 38.5 and -18.4 to 44.3 mmHg, respectively. The average SBP values obtained by HSBP were 4.3 mmHg higher than those obtained by ABPM ( P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our study showed good agreement and concordance between the two office methods as well between the two out-to-office methods, although there was a significant difference in the mean SBP between the HSBP and ABPM. Moreover, AOBP was not comparable to either HSBP or ABPM; therefore, the estimation of out-to-office BP using AOBP is not supported.