The metabolic syndrome in hypertension: European society of hypertension position statement.

The metabolic syndrome considerably increases the risk of cardiovascular and renal events in hypertension. It has been associated with a wide range of classical and new cardiovascular risk factors as well as with early signs of subclinical cardiovascular and renal damage. Obesity and insulin resistance, beside a constellation of independent factors, which include molecules of hepatic, vascular, and immunologic origin with proinflammatory properties, have been implicated in the pathogenesis. The close relationships among the different components of the syndrome and their associated disturbances make it difficult to understand what the underlying causes and consequences are. At each of these key points, insulin resistance and obesity/proinflammatory molecules, interaction of demographics, lifestyle, genetic factors, and environmental fetal programming results in the final phenotype. High prevalence of end-organ damage and poor prognosis has been demonstrated in a large number of cross-sectional and a few number of prospective studies. The objective of treatment is both to reduce the high risk of a cardiovascular or a renal event and to prevent the much greater chance that metabolic syndrome patients have to develop type 2 diabetes or hypertension. Treatment consists in the opposition to the underlying mechanisms of the metabolic syndrome, adopting lifestyle interventions that effectively reduce visceral obesity with or without the use of drugs that oppose the development of insulin resistance or body weight gain. Treatment of the individual components of the syndrome is also necessary. Concerning blood pressure control, it should be based on lifestyle changes, diet, and physical exercise, which allows for weight reduction and improves muscular blood flow. When antihypertensive drugs are necessary, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II-AT1 receptor blockers, or even calcium channel blockers are preferable over diuretics and classical beta-blockers in monotherapy, if no compelling indications are present for its use. If a combination of drugs is required, low-dose diuretics can be used. A combination of thiazide diuretics and beta-blockers should be avoided.

Medical treatment of hypertension in Switzerland. The 2009 Swiss Hypertension Survey (SWISSHYPE).

OBJECTIVES: Despite a broad and efficient pharmacological antihypertensive armamentarium, blood pressure (BP) control is suboptimal and heterogeneous throughout Europe. Recent representative data from Switzerland are limited. The goal of the present survey was therefore to assess the actual control rate of high BP in Switzerland in accordance with current guidelines. The influence of risk factors, target organ damage and medication on BP levels and control was also evaluated.METHODS : A cross-sectional visit-based survey of ambulatory hypertensive patients was performed in 2009 in Switzerland. 281 randomly selected physicians provided data on 5 consecutive hypertensive patients attending their practices for BP follow-up. Data were anonymously collected on demographics, comorbidities and current medication, and BP was recorded. Subsequent modification of pharmacological antihypertensive therapy was assessed.RESULTS : Data from 1376 patients were available. Mean age was 65 +/- 12 years, 53.9% were male subjects. 26.4% had complicated hypertension. Overall, BP control (<140/90 mm Hg for uncomplicated and <130/80 mm Hg for complicated hypertension) was achieved in 48.9%. Compared to patients with complicated hypertension, BP control was better in patients with uncomplicated hypertension (59.4% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001). As a monotherapy the most prescribed drug class were angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB, 41%), followed by angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (21.5%), betablockers (20.8%) and calcium channel blockers (CCB, 10.8%). The most prescribed drug combinations were ARB + diuretic (30.1%) and ACE inhibitors + diuretic (15.3%). 46% were receiving a fixed drug combination. In only 32.7% of patients with uncontrolled hypertension was a change in drug therapy made.CONCLUSION : This representative survey on treated adult hypertensive patients shows that, compared to earlier reports, the control rate of hypertension has improved in Switzerland for uncomplicated but not for complicated, particularly diabetes-associated hypertension. ARBs and ACE inhibitors are the most prescribed antihypertensive drugs for monotherapy, whereas diuretics and ARBs were the most used for combination therapy.

Différences induites par la définition des périodes diurnes et nocturnes sur la pression artérielle et le dipping lors d'une mesure ambulatoire de la pression artérielle [Effects of nighttime and daytime interval definition on blood pressure and dipping in patients referred for ambulatory blood pressure measurement].

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) has become indispensable for the diagnosis and control of hypertension. However, no consensus exists on how daytime and nighttime periods should be defined. OBJECTIVE: To compare daytime and nighttime blood pressure (BP) defined by an actigraph and by body position with BP resulting from arbitrary daytime and nighttime periods. PATIENTS AND METHOD: ABPM, sleeping periods and body position were recorded simultaneously using an actigraph (SenseWear Armband(®)) in patients referred for ABPM. BP results obtained with the actigraph (sleep and position) were compared to the results obtained with fixed daytime (7a.m.-10p.m.) and nighttime (10p.m.-7a.m.) periods. RESULTS: Data from 103 participants were available. More than half of them were taking antihypertensive drugs. Nocturnal BP was lower (systolic BP: 2.08±4.50mmHg; diastolic BP: 1.84±2.99mmHg, P<0.05) and dipping was more marked (systolic BP: 1.54±3.76%; diastolic BP: 2.27±3.48%, P<0.05) when nighttime was defined with the actigraph. Standing BP was higher (systolic BP 1.07±2.81mmHg; diastolic BP: 1.34±2.50mmHg) than daytime BP defined by a fixed period. CONCLUSION: Diurnal BP, nocturnal BP and dipping are influenced by the definition of daytime and nighttime periods. Studies evaluating the prognostic value of each method are needed to clarify which definition should be used.

Innappropriate renin secretion unmasked by captopril (SQ 14 225) in hypertension of chronic renal failure

Captopril (SQ 14 225), an orally active inhibitor of angiotensin-converting enzyme, was given to 7 hypertensive patients with chronic renal failure whose plasma-creatinine ranged from 1.5--7.4 mg/dl; whose plasma-renin activity was normal; whose hypertension was not controlled by previous therapy consisting in 5 patients of three or more antihypertensive drugs; and whose blood-pressures averaged 176/111 +/- 11/3 mm Hg. Inhibition of converting enzyme by oral captopril, 200 mg twice daily, reduced blood-pressure to 156/100 +/- 9/5 mm Hg. 5 patients needed additional treatment by frusemide 40--250 mg/day orally. With this combined regimen the blood-pressure of all patients averaged 126/85 +/- 4/3 mm Hg after 8 +/- 2 weeks of captopril. The drug was well tolerated. These results suggest that inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme with or without sodium depletion is an efficient treatment for hypertension associated with chronic renal failure. It appears that although renin levels in patients with this condition may be "normal", they are inappropriate in relation to the subtle degree of sodium retention that occurs with this disorder.

Nouvelles approches therapeutiques de l'hypertension arterielle. [New therapeutic approaches to arterial hypertension]

Today two largely new approaches are available for the treatment of clinical hypertension. First, captopril, an orally active angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, makes possible chronic blockade of the renin-angiotensin system. This compound, given alone or in combination with a diuretic, normalizes the blood pressure of most hypertensive patients. Unfortunately, because captopril may induce serious adverse effects the use of this inhibitor must be restricted to patients with high blood pressure refractory to conventional antihypertensive drugs. Second, compounds such as verapamil and nifedipine are capable of producing a marked vasodilating effect by inhibiting the entry of calcium into the vascular smooth muscle cells. However, the role of calcium channel blockers in the treatment of hypertensive disease awaits more precise definition.

Nouvelles recommandations de l'ESH/ESC: des changements en douceur pour le malade hypertendu [New recommendations of the ESH/ESC: smooth changes for the hypertensive patient].

The last recommendations of the European Society of Hypertension and the European Society of Cardiology made available deal with the diagnosis and the treatment of arterial hypertension. They point to the importance of both 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and home blood pressure measurement. They also underscore the importance of stratifying cardiovascular risk and of controlling strictly blood pressure using hygienic measures and antihypertensive drugs, either as monotherapy or combination therapy.

Angiotensin receptor blockers are not associated with reduced inflammatory markers in the general population.

OBJECTIVE: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been suggested to reduce inflammation in randomized controlled trials. We assessed the association between ARBs and inflammatory markers in a general population setting. METHODS: This is a population-based prospective study conducted in Lausanne, Switzerland. Baseline data from 933 participants on antihypertensive drugs (424 on ARBs) was collected in 2003-2006. Follow-up data from 1120 participants (572 on ARBs) was collected in 2009-2012. C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukins 1β and 6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) were assessed and categorized in quartiles. RESULTS: At baseline, no differences were found between participants taking or not taking ARBs for all inflammatory markers studied, and this association persisted after multivariate adjustment: odds ratios (ORs) and (95% confidence interval) for being in the highest quartile of interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, TNF-α and CRP for participants on ARB compared to participants not on ARB were 1.23 (0.89-1.70), 1.26 (0.93-1.70), 1.14 (0.85-1.53) and 1.27 (0.96-1.69) respectively (P > 0.05). These findings were further replicated in the follow-up study: OR and (95% CI) of 1.10 (0.78-1.55), 0.87 (0.64-1.19), 0.83 (0.61-1.14) and 0.91 (0.68-1.22) for interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, TNF-α and CRP respectively (P > 0.05). Finally, no effect of ARBs was found when comparing participants who received ARBs throughout the 5.4-year follow-up with participants on other antihypertensive drugs: OR and (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.61-1.42), 0.80 (0.54-1.17), 0.86 (0.59-1.25) and 0.95 (0.67-1.35) for interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, TNF-α and CRP respectively (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: ARBs are not associated with reduced levels of inflammatory markers in the general population.

Hypertension artérielle réfractaire au traitement due au syndrome d'apnées du sommeil et à la prise de médicaments [Obstructive sleep apnea and drugs as causes of treatment-resistant hypertension].

Treatment-resistant hypertension is still common despite the availability of several types of antihypertensive agents acting by different mechanisms. The existence of refractory hypertension should lead to rule out "white-coat hypertension", poor adherence to prescribed drugs as well as classical causes of secondary hypertension such as renal artery stenosis, primary aldosteronism, pheochromocytoma and renal disease. It is also important to consider the possible existence of obstructive sleep apnea or the regular intake of vasopressive drugs or substances.

Les combinaisons fixes de medicaments antihypertenseurs. [Fixed antihypertensive drug combinations]

Arterial hypertension is a highly heterogeneous condition. It is therefore not surprising that blood pressure lowering agents acting via a given mechanism allow a normalization of blood pressure in a fraction of hypertensive subjects only. The combination of drugs with different mechanisms of action on the cardiovascular system results in a considerably higher antihypertensive efficacy, not only with regard to the absolute blood pressure reduction but also in the number of responders. This effect is not achieved at the expenses of tolerance, because usually lower doses of the combined agents are sufficient to achieve the target blood pressure. The administration of antihypertensive agents in fixed combination has the advantage of its simplicity for both the physician as well as the patient. This aspect also explains the increasing popularity of fixed combinations as a valuable option in the initial treatment of the hypertensive patient.

Hypertension artérielle réfractaire au traitement due au syndrome d'apnées du sommeil et à la prise de médicaments [Obstructive sleep apnea and drugs as causes of treatment-resistant hypertension].

Treatment-resistant hypertension is still common despite the availability of several types of antihypertensive agents acting by different mechanisms. The existence of refractory hypertension should lead to rule out "white-coat hypertension", poor adherence to prescribed drugs as well as classical causes of secondary hypertension such as renal artery stenosis, primary aldosteronism, pheochromocytoma and renal disease. It is also important to consider the possible existence of obstructive sleep apnea or the regular intake of vasopressive drugs or substances.

How quickly should we titrate antihypertensive medication? Systematic review modelling blood pressure response from trial data.

Context There are no evidence syntheses available to guide clinicians on when to titrate antihypertensive medication after initiation. Objective To model the blood pressure (BP) response after initiating antihypertensive medication. Data sources electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register and reference lists up to December 2009. Study selection Trials that initiated antihypertensive medication as single therapy in hypertensive patients who were either drug naive or had a placebo washout from previous drugs. Data extraction Office BP measurements at a minimum of two weekly intervals for a minimum of 4 weeks. An asymptotic approach model of BP response was assumed and non-linear mixed effects modelling used to calculate model parameters. Results and conclusions Eighteen trials that recruited 4168 patients met inclusion criteria. The time to reach 50% of the maximum estimated BP lowering effect was 1 week (systolic 0.91 weeks, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.10; diastolic 0.95, 0.75 to 1.15). Models incorporating drug class as a source of variability did not improve fit of the data. Incorporating the presence of a titration schedule improved model fit for both systolic and diastolic pressure. Titration increased both the predicted maximum effect and the time taken to reach 50% of the maximum (systolic 1.2 vs 0.7 weeks; diastolic 1.4 vs 0.7 weeks). Conclusions Estimates of the maximum efficacy of antihypertensive agents can be made early after starting therapy. This knowledge will guide clinicians in deciding when a newly started antihypertensive agent is likely to be effective or not at controlling BP.

Evaluation par des médecins installés de l'efficacité antihypertensive de la débrisoquine, de la méthyldopa et du propranolol [Evaluation by practicing physicians of the antihypertensive efficacy of debrisoquin, methyldopa and propranolol]

The antihypertensive effect of debrisoquine (20 mg/day), methyldopa (100 mg/day) and propranolol (160 mg/day) was compared to that obtained with a placebo in a controlled trial carried out by a group of 14 internists. Forty-eight patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension were included. Mefruside (25 mg/day) was first given alone for 6 weeks ("open phase" of the trial) and to this diuretic was then added in double-blind fashion and randomized sequence a placebo or an active drug. Each of the 4 blind phases lasted 4 weeks. At the end of the "open phase", blood pressure in seated position averaged 168/111 +/- 19.6/13.5 mm Hg (mean +/- SD). A significant blood pressure decrease was observed after 4 weeks of treatment with the placebo as well as with the investigated compounds. With the placebo blood pressure was reduced to 158/102 +/- 19.6/13.5 mm Hg (p less than 0.001). The magnitude of the additional blood pressure decrease induced by the active drugs was relatively small and varied from 4 (debrisoquine) to 10 mm Hg (methyldopa, p less than 0.01) for the systolic and from 3 (debrisoquine, p less than 0.05) to 5 mm Hg (propranolol, p less than 0.05) for the diastolic. The percentage of patients with systolic pressure of less than or equal to 140 mm Hg and with diastolic pressure of less than 90 mm Hg during administration of either drug was not greater than 40 to 20% respectively. Propranolol appeared to be better tolerated than the other antihypertensive agents. These rather disappointing blood pressure results suggest that the efficacy of antihypertensive agents in private practice cannot be extrapolated from studies carried out in specialized hypertension clinics.

Impact of prolonged antihypertensive duration of action on predicted clinical outcomes in imperfectly adherent patients: comparison of aliskiren, irbesartan and ramipril.

Background: Most patients miss occasional doses of antihypertensives. The use of 'forgiving' drugs (i.e. drugs with duration of action longer than the 24-h dosing interval) may allow an adequate blood pressure (BP) reduction to be maintained despite missed doses. Aim:To quantify the effects of adherence level and duration of action on estimated mean systolic BP (SBP) reduction and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Method:For 1250 patients, we simulated 256-day dosing histories with realistically distributed drug holidays based on a study of electronically monitored dosing records. Adherence was set to the desired level by altering the proportion of doses missed. Mean office SBP-lowering effect (aliskiren 300 mg, -14.1 mmHg; irbesartan 300 mg, -13.3; ramipril 10 mg, -10.1 mmHg) and the rate of SBP increase after stopping treatment (off-rate; aliskiren, 1.0 mmHg/day; irbesartan, 3.6 mmHg/day; ramipril, 4.0 mmHg/day) were taken from the results of a randomised, double-blind trial. SBP was averaged over time and patient to estimate mean reductions in SBP and 10-year CVD risk (Framingham risk equation, baseline absolute 10-year CVD risk: 27%). Results:Predicted reductions in SBP and CVD risk with aliskiren were larger and less affected by imperfect adherence than the reductions with irbesartan or ramipril. For aliskiren, reducing adherence from 90% to 60% led to a predicted rise in SBP of 1.0 mmHg and three additional CVD events per 1000 treated patients; larger predicted differences were observed for irbesartan (2.5 mmHg; 7.5 events/1000 treated patients) and ramipril (2.2 mmHg; 6.7 events/1000 treated patients). Conclusion:To offset the effects of imperfect adherence, a common challenge with antihypertensives, for better BP management it may be prudent to prescribe 'forgiving' drugs.

Assessment of drug compliance in patients with high blood pressure resistant to antihypertensive therapy.

The persistence of high blood pressure under antihypertensive treatment (resistant hypertension) entails an increased cardiovascular risk. It occurs in three of ten treated hypertensive patients, and has several possible contributing factors, notably insufficient therapeutic adherence. There are a number of ways to evaluate whether patients take their medication as prescribed. These include interviewing the patient, pill counting, prescription follow-up, assay of drugs in blood or urine, and use of electronic pill dispensers. None is perfect. However, the essential is to discuss with the patient the importance of complying with the treatment as soon as it is prescribed for the first time, and not waiting for the appearance of resistant hypertension. The measurement of blood pressure outside the medical office and the monitoring of adherence may help to identify patients in whom hypertension is truly resistant and so to tailor the measures required to improve the control of blood pressure in the most appropriate manner.

Trials using a crossover design and ambulatory blood pressure recordings to determine the efficacy of antihypertensive agents in individual patients.

The antihypertensive effects of the beta-blocking agent betaxolol and the calcium entry blocker verapamil were compared in a crossover single-blind trial. Seventeen patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension took either betaxolol or a slow-release formulation of verapamil for two consecutive 6-week periods. The sequence of treatment phases was randomly allocated and a 2-week washout period preceded each treatment. The antihypertensive effect of the test drugs was assessed both at the physician's office and during everyday activities using a portable blood pressure recorder. The crossover design of the trial made it possible to evaluate the antihypertensive efficacy of betaxolol and verapamil both in the group as a whole and in the individual patient. The individual patient response to one of these agents was not a reliable indicator of the same patient's response to the alternative agent. Betaxolol brought both office and ambulatory recorded blood pressures under control in a larger fraction of patients than verapamil, although the magnitude of the blood pressure fall in the responders was equal for each drug. These observations stress the need for an individualized approach to the evaluation of antihypertensive therapy. The present results also demonstrate that optimal antihypertensive therapy is still a matter of trial and error. The precise methodology that ought to characterize crossover trials may make it possible to improve the therapeutic approach to hypertensive patients.