Use of oral antihypertensive medication preceding blood pressure elevation in hospitalized patients

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency of oral antihypertensive medication preceding the increase in blood pressure in patients in a university hospital, the drug of choice, and the maintained use of antihypertensive medication. METHODS: Data from January to June 1997 from the University Hospital Professor Edgard Santos Pharmacy concerning the prescriptions of all inpatients were used. Variables included in the analysis were: antihypertensive medication prescription preceding increase in blood pressure, type of antihypertensive medication, gender, clinical or surgical wards, and the presence of maintained antihypertensive medication. RESULTS: The hospital admitted 2,532 patients, 1,468 in surgical wards and 818 in medical wards. Antihypertensive medication prescription preceding pressure increase was observed in 578 patients (22.8%). Nifedipine was used in 553 (95.7%) and captopril in 25 (4.3%). In 50.7% of patients, prescription of antihypertensive medication was not associated with maintained antihypertensive medication. Prescription of antihypertensive drugs preceding elevation of blood pressure was significantly (p<0.001) more frequent on the surgical floor (27.5%; 405/1468) than on the medical floor (14.3%; 117/818). The frequency of prescription of antihypertensive drugs preceding elevation of blood pressure without maintained antihypertensive drugs and the ratio between the number of prescriptions of nifedipine and captopril were greater in surgical wards. CONCLUSION: The use of antihypertensive medication, preceding elevation of blood pressure (22.8%) observed in admitted patients is not supported by scientific evidence. The high frequency of this practice may be even greater in nonuniversity hospitals.

Position of indapamide , a diuretic with vasorelaxant activities, in antihypertensive therapy.

Introduction: Diuretics play a pivotal role in the management of hypertension. A large experience has been accumulated with indapamide , a long-acting thiazide-like diuretic that lowers blood pressure (BP) primarily through its natriuretic diuretic effect. Some of its long-term antihypertensive efficacy may be due to calcium antagonist-like vasorelaxant activities. Indapamide has protecting effects in a variety of conditions associated with high cardiovascular risk, such as diabetes, left ventricular hypertrophy, nephropathy and stroke. It is highly effective in lowering BP, whether given alone or in combination. Indapamide is well tolerated and has the advantage of having no adverse impact on glucose and lipid metabolism. Today, thiazide-like diuretics are regarded more and more as preferred drugs, when diuretic therapy is required to lower BP. Areas covered: The aim of this paper is to review the experience accumulated with indapamide. It is limited to clinical studies that are relevant for the everyday management of hypertensive patients, whether or not they exhibit cardiovascular or renal disease. Expert opinion: Indapamide, because of its well-documented beneficial effects on cardiovascular and renal outcomes, represents a safe and valuable option for treating patients with high BP. There is, however, still room for new trials evaluating the combination of this diuretic with other types of antihypertensive drugs, in particular a calcium antagonist such as amlodipine. There is also the need to compare the indapamide-perindopril and indapamide-amlodipine combinations, in terms of antihypertensive efficacy, tolerability and effects on target organ damage and, ideally, on cardiovascular mortality.

State-of-the-art treatment of hypertension: established and new drugs.

The treatment of essential hypertension is based essentially on the prescription of four major classes of antihypertensive drugs, i.e. blockers of the renin-angiotensin system, calcium channel blockers, diuretics and beta-blockers. In recent years, very few new drug therapies of hypertension have become available. Therefore, it is crucial for physicians to optimize their antihypertensive therapies with the drugs available on the market. In each of the classes of antihypertensive drugs, questions have recently been raised: are angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors superior to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB)? Is it possible to reduce the incidence of peripheral oedema with calcium antagonists? Is hydrochlorothiazide really the good diuretic to use in combination therapies? The purpose of this review is to discuss these various questions in the light of the most recent clinical studies and meta-analyses. These latter suggest that ACE inhibitors and ARB are equivalent except for a better tolerability profile of ARB. Third generation calcium channel blockers enable to reduce the incidence of peripheral oedema and chlorthalidone is certainly more effective than hydrochlorothiazide in preventing cardiovascular events in hypertension. At last, studies suggest that drug adherence and long-term persistence under therapy is one of the major issues in the actual management of essential hypertension.

Antihypertensive drug treatment changes in the general population: the CoLaus study.

BACKGROUND: Changes in antihypertensive drug treatment are paramount in the adequate management of patients with hypertension, still, there is little information regarding changes in antihypertensive drug treatment in Switzerland. Our aim was to assess those changes and associated factors in a population-based, prospective study. METHODS: Data from the population-based, CoLaus study, conducted among subjects initially aged 35-75 years and living in Lausanne, Switzerland. 772 hypertensive subjects (371 women) were followed for a median of 5.4 years. Data Subjects were defined as continuers (no change), switchers (one antihypertensive class replaced by another), combiners (one antihypertensive class added) and discontinuers (stopped treatment). The distribution and the factors associated with changes in antihypertensive drug treatment were assessed. RESULTS: During the study period, the prescription of diuretics decreased and of ARBs increased: at baseline, diuretics were taken by 46.9% of patients; angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) by 44.7%, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) by 28.8%, beta-blockers (BB) by 28.0%, calcium channel blockers (CCB) by 18.9% and other antihypertensive drugs by 0.3%. At follow-up (approximately 5 years later), their corresponding percentages were 42.8%, 51.7%, 25.5%, 33.0% 20.7% and 1.0%. Among all participants, 54.4% (95% confidence interval: 50.8-58.0) were continuers, 26.9% (23.8-30.2) combiners, 12.7% (10.4-15.3) switchers and 6.0% (4.4-7.9) discontinuers. Combiners had higher systolic blood pressure values at baseline than the other groups (p < 0.05). Almost one third (30.6%) of switchers and 29.3% of combiners improved their blood pressure status at follow-up, versus 18.8% of continuers and 8.7% of discontinuers (p < 0.001). Conversely, almost one third (28.3%) of discontinuers became hypertensive (systolic ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic ≥90 mm Hg), vs. 22.1% of continuers, 16.3% of switchers and 11.5% of combiners (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed baseline uncontrolled hypertension, ARBs, drug regimen (monotherapy/polytherapy) and overweight/obesity to be associated with changes in antihypertensive therapy. CONCLUSION: In Switzerland, ARBs have replaced diuretics as the most commonly prescribed antihypertensive drug. Uncontrolled hypertension, ARBs, drug regimen (monotherapy or polytherapy) and overweight/obesity are associated with changes in antihypertensive treatment.

Comparative cardiovascular effects of drugs used for hypertension.

Currently 4 classes of antihypertensive drugs - diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors - are most commonly used to treat hypertensive patients. Each class of drug has a distinctive cardiovascular pharmacodynamic profile and even within classes there exist agents with slightly different properties. The effects of the various drug classes on the heart and peripheral circulation, on the kidney and electrolyte metabolism, on the brain and on the renin-angiotensin system are now reasonably well described. Knowledge and understanding of these different cardiovascular effects are extremely important in order to adapt treatment to the needs of an individual patient. Furthermore, when combination therapy becomes necessary, the different cardiovascular aspects of the various drugs can be used to enhance antihypertensive efficacy and to attenuate adverse effects of separate compounds.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to assess antihypertensive therapy in private practice

Non-invasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring has proved to be very useful in evaluating hypertensive patients. However, most previous studies were performed in specialised centres. Here the results of two trials are presented in which private physicians used ambulatory BP monitoring to assess the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs. The results were very similar to those observed previously in specialised clinics. In the individual patient, the level of ambulatory recorded pressure could not be predicted based on BP readings taken at the doctor's office. Also, the BP response to antihypertensive therapy was more reproducible when evaluated by ambulatory BP monitoring than by the doctor. Thus, the use of noninvasive ambulatory BP monitoring is also very appropriate in everyday practice for the management of hypertensive patients.

Antihypertensive Combination Treatment: State of the Art.

An adequate control of blood pressure is essential to reduce the risk of target organ damages and cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension. Yet, it is well recognized that a substantial proportion of treated patients remain hypertensive despite treatment. Several reasons have been evoked to explain why so many patients are not adequately controlled. Among them, medical inertia, a poor long-term adherence, and the need to prescribe several antihypertensive drugs to reach the target blood pressure have been identified as major limitations to the success of antihypertensive therapy. In this context, the use of single-pill combinations (SPC) containing two or three drugs in one pill has an important role in reducing the impact of some of these issues. Indeed, the use of SPC enables to reduce the pill burden and to improve the treatment efficacy without increasing the incidence of side effects. However, besides their major advantages, SPC have also some limitations such as a possible lack of flexibility or a higher cost. The purpose of this review is to discuss the place of SPC in the actual management of hypertension. The active development of new single-pill combinations in last years can be considered as a significant improvement in the physicians' capacity to treat hypertension effectively.

Oral drugs for hypertensive urgencies: systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: Urgências hipertensivas são definidas como elevações graves na pressão arterial sem evidência de danos agudos ou progressivos a órgãos-alvo. A necessidade de tratamento é considerada urgente, mas permite um controle gradual, utilizando-se drogas orais ou sublinguais. Se o aumento na pressão arterial não está associado a risco de vida ou danos a órgãos alvo, o controle pressórico deve ser feito lentamente durante 24 horas. em relação às urgências hipertensivas, não é conhecida qual a classe de drogas anti-hipertensivas que promove os melhores resultados e há controvérsia em relação a quando e quais as drogas devem ser utilizadas nestas situações. O objetivo desta revisão foi avaliar a efetividade e a segurança de drogas orais para urgências hipertensivas. METODOS: Esta revisão sistemática da literatura foi desenvolvida no Centro Cochrane do Brasil, e na Disciplina de Medicina de Urgência e Medicina Baseada em Evidências da Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) - Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), de acordo com a metodologia da Colaboração Cochrane. RESULTADOS: Os 16 ensaios clínicos aleatórios selecionados incluíram 769 participantes e demonstraram um efeito superior dos inibidores da enzima conversora de angiotensina no tratamento da urgência hipertensiva, avaliada em 223 participantes. Os efeitos adversos mais frequentes para os bloqueadores de canal de cálcio foram cefaleia (35/206), rubor (17/172) e alterações do ritmo cardíaco (14/189); para os inibidores da enzima conversora de angiotensina, o efeito colateral mais frequente foi disgeusia (25/38). CONCLUSÕES: Há evidências importantes a favor do uso de inibidores da enzima conversora da angiotensina para o tratamento de urgências hipertensivas, quando comparados aos bloqueadores dos canais de cálcio, devido a maior efetividade e à menor frequência de efeitos adversos, como cefaléia e rubor facial.

An economic evaluation of antihypertensive therapies based on clinical trials

OBJECTIVE: Hypertension is a major issue in public health, and the financial costs associated with hypertension continue to increase. Cost-effectiveness studies focusing on antihypertensive drug combinations, however, have been scarce. The cost-effectiveness ratios of the traditional treatment (hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol) and the current treatment (losartan and amlodipine) were evaluated in patients with grade 1 or 2 hypertension (HT1-2). For patients with grade 3 hypertension (HT3), a third drug was added to the treatment combinations: enalapril was added to the traditional treatment, and hydrochlorothiazide was added to the current treatment. METHODS: Hypertension treatment costs were estimated on the basis of the purchase prices of the antihypertensive medications, and effectiveness was measured as the reduction in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure (in mm Hg) at the end of a 12-month study period. RESULTS: When the purchase price of the brand-name medication was used to calculate the cost, the traditional treatment presented a lower cost-effectiveness ratio [US$/mm Hg] than the current treatment in the HT1-2 group. In the HT3 group, however, there was no difference in cost-effectiveness ratio between the traditional treatment and the current treatment. The cost-effectiveness ratio differences between the treatment regimens maintained the same pattern when the purchase price of the lower-cost medication was used. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the traditional treatment is more cost-effective (US$/mm Hg) than the current treatment in the HT1-2 group. There was no difference in cost-effectiveness between the traditional treatment and the current treatment for the HT3 group.

Effects of antihypertensive-drug class on interindividual variation in blood pressure and risk of stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Unexplained differences between classes of antihypertensive drugs in their effectiveness in preventing stroke might be due to class effects on intraindividual variability in blood pressure. We did a systematic review to assess any such effects in randomised controlled trials.

Prescription of drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system in Italian children

Little is known about the prescription pattern of antihypertensive drugs for children with impaired kidney function. We have therefore documented the use of antihypertensive drugs in this patient group by evaluating the Italian pediatric population-based registry of patients with chronic kidney disease on conservative treatment (ItalKid) from 1995 to 2003. In 1995, prescriptions written for antihypertensive drugs for use by children were approximately equally divided among drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system and calcium channel blockers (38 vs. 43% of all prescriptions), followed by beta-blockers and diuretics (15 and 4%, respectively). During subsequent years the proportion of prescriptions for drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system increased (2003: 61%; p<0.001) and that of calcium channel blockers decreased (2003: 18%, p<0.001). In 1995, blockers of the renin-angiotensin system were prescribed, either as monotherapy or in combination, in 53% of the patients, but the relative frequency of the patients prescribed these drugs increased up to 83% in 2003 (p<0.0005). In conclusion, physicians caring for Italian children with impaired kidney function are increasingly prescribing drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system.

Taste acceptability of pulverized brand-name and generic drugs containing amlodipine or candesartan.

Trials with pulverized brand-name antihypertensive drugs suggest that, from the perspective of taste acceptability, crushed candesartan, chlortalidon, hydrochlorothiazide, lercanidipine and lisinopril should be preferred to pulverized amlodipine, atenolol, bisoprolol, enalapril, irbesartan, losartan, ramipril, telmisartan and valsartan. Brand-name antihypertensive drugs and the corresponding generic medicines have never been compared with respect to their taste acceptability. We therefore investigated among healthy health care workers the taste acceptability of a pulverized 1 mg-test dose of the brand-name and two generics containing either the dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker amlodipine (Norvasc(®), Amlodipin-Mepha(®) and Amlodipin Pfizer(®)) or the angiotensin receptor antagonist candesartan (Atacand(®), Cansartan-Mepha(®) and Pemzek(®)). For this purpose, a smiley-face scale depicting four degrees of pleasure was used. Between November and December 2013, the taste test was performed among 19 nurses (15 female and 4 male subjects) and 12 physicians (5 female and 7 male subjects) aged between 25 and 49 years. Pulverized brand-names and generics containing either amlodipine or candesartan did not differ with respect to their taste acceptability.

Studies of antihypertensive drug persistence and adherence in the Glasgow Blood Pressure Clinic

Hypertension (HTN) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases including stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), chronic renal failure, peripheral vascular disease, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure and premature death. The prevalence of HTN in Scotland is very high and although a high proportion of the patients receive antihypertensive medications, blood pressure (BP) control is very low. Recommendations for starting a specific antihypertensive class have been debated between various guidelines over the years. Some guidelines and HTN studies have preferred to start with a combination of an antihypertensive class instead of using a single therapy, and they have found greater BP reductions with combination therapies than with monotherapy. However, it has been shown in several clinical trials that 20% to 35% of hypertensive patients could not achieve the target BP, even though they received more than three antihypertensive medications. Several factors were found to affect BP control. Adherence and persistence were considered as the factors contributing the most to uncontrolled hypertension. Other factors such as age, sex, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, baseline systolic BP (SBP), and the communication between physicians and patients have been shown to be associated with uncontrolled BP and resistant hypertension. Persistence, adherence and compliance are interchangeable terms and have been used in the literature to describe a patient’s behaviour with their antihypertensive drugs and prescriptions. The methods used to determine persistence and adherence, as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria, vary between persistence and adherence studies. The prevalence of persistence and adherence have varied between these studies, and were determined to be high in some studies and low in others. The initiation of a specific antihypertensive class has frequently been associated with an increase or decrease in adherence and persistence. The tolerability and efficacy of the initial antihypertensive class have been the most common methods of explaining this association. There are also many factors that suggest a relationship with adherence and persistence. Some factors in previous studies, such as age, were frequently associated with adherence and persistence. On the other hand, relationships with certain factors have varied between the studies. The associations of age, sex, alcohol use, smoking, baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), the presence of comorbidities, an increase in the number of pills and the relationship between patients and physicians with adherence and persistence have been the most commonly investigated factors. Most studies have defined persistence in terms of a patient still taking medication after a period of time. A medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥ 80 has been used to define compliance. Either of these terminologies, or both, have been used to estimate adherence. In this study, I used the same definition for persistence to identify patients who have continued with their initial treatment, and used persistence and MPR to define patients who adhered to their initial treatment. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of persistence and adherence in Scotland. Also, factors that could have had an effect on persistence and adherence were studied. The number of antihypertensive drugs taken by patients during the study and factors that led to an increase in patients being on a combination therapy were also evaluated. The prevalence of resistance and BP control were determined by taking the BP after the last drug had been taken by persistent patients during five follow-up studies. The relationship of factors such as age, sex, BMI, alcohol use, smoking, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and albumin levels with BP reductions for each antihypertensive class were determined. Information Services Division (ISD) data, which includes all antihypertensive drugs, were collected from pharmacies in Scotland and linked to the Glasgow Blood Pressure Clinic (GBPC) database. This database also includes demographic characteristics, BP readings and clinical results for all patients attending the GBPC. The case notes for patients who attended the GBPC were reviewed and all new antihypertensive drugs that were prescribed between visits, BP before and after taking drugs, and any changes in the hypertensive drugs were recorded. A total of 4,232 hypertensive patients were included in the first study. The first study showed that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and beta-blockers (BB) were the most prescribed antihypertensive classes between 2004 and 2013. Calcium channel blockers (CCB), thiazide diuretics and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) followed ACEI and BB as the most prescribed drugs during the same period. The prescription trend of the antihypertensive class has changed over the years with an increase in prescriptions for ACEI and ARB and a decrease in prescriptions for BB and diuretics. I observed a difference in antihypertensive class prescriptions by age, sex, SBP and BMI. For example, CCB, thiazide diuretics and alpha-blockers were more likely to be prescribed to older patients, while ACEI, ARB or BB were more commonly prescribed for younger patients. In a second study, 4,232 and 3,149 hypertensive patients were included to investigate the prevalence of persistence in the Scottish population in 1- and 5-year studies, respectively. The prevalence of persistence in the 1-year study was 72.9%, while it was only 62.8% in the 5-year study. Those patients taking ARB and ACEI showed high rates of persistence and those taking diuretics and alpha blockers had low rates of persistence. The association of persistence with clinical characteristics was also investigated. Younger patients were more likely to totally stop their treatment before restarting their treatment with other antihypertensive drugs. Furthermore, patients who had high SBP tended to be non-persistent. In a third study, 3,085 and 1,979 patients who persisted with their treatment were included. In the first part of the study, MPR was calculated, and patients with an MPR ≥ 80 were considered as adherent. Adherence rates were 29.9% and 23.4% in the 1- and 5-year studies, respectively. Patients who initiated the study with ACEI were more likely to adhere to their treatments. However, patients who initiated the study with thiazide diuretics were less likely to adhere to their treatments. Sex, age and BMI were different between the adherence and non-adherence groups. Age was an independent factor affecting adherence rates during both the 1- and 5-year studies with older patients being more likely to be adherent. In the second part of the study, pharmacy databases were checked with patients' case notes to compare antihypertensive drugs that were collected from the pharmacy with the antihypertensive prescription given during the patient’s clinical visit. While 78.6% of the antihypertensive drugs were collected between clinical visits, 21.4% were not collected. Patients who had more days to see the doctor in the subsequent visit were more likely to not collect their prescriptions. In a fourth study, 3,085 and 1,979 persistent patients were included to calculate the number of antihypertensive classes that were added to the initial drug during the 1-year and 5-year studies, respectively. Patients who continued with treatment as a monotherapy and who needed a combination therapy were investigated during the 1- and 5-year studies. In all, 55.8% used antihypertensive drugs as a monotherapy and 44.2% used them as a combination therapy during the 1-year study. While 28.2% of patients continued with treatment without the required additional therapy, 71.8% of the patients needed additional therapy. In all, 20.8% and 46.5% of patients required three different antihypertensive classes or more during the 1-year and 5-year studies, respectively. Patients who started with ACEI, ARB and BB were more likely to continue as monotherapy and less likely to need two more antihypertensive drugs compared with those who started with alpha-blockers, non-thiazide diuretics and CCB. Older ages, high BMI levels, high SBP and high alcohol intake were independent factors that led to an increase in the probability of patients taking combination therapies. In the first part of the final study, BPs were recorded after the last drug had been taken during the 5 year study. There were 815 persistent patients who were assigned for this purpose. Of these, 39% had taken one, two or three antihypertensive classes and had controlled BP (controlled hypertension [HTN]), 29% of them took one or two antihypertensive classes and had uncontrolled BP (uncontrolled HTN), and 32% of the patients took three antihypertensive classes or more and had uncontrolled BP (resistant HTN). The initiation of an antihypertensive drug and the factors affecting BP pressure were compared between the resistant and controlled HTN groups. Patients who initiated the study with ACEI were less likely to be resistant compared with those who started with alpha blockers and non-thiazide diuretics. Older patients, and high BMI tended to result in resistant HTN. In the second part of study, BP responses for patients who initiated the study with ACEI, ARB, BB, CCB and thiazide diuretics were compared. After adjusting for risk factors, patients who initiated the study with ACEI and ARB were more respondent than those who took CCB and thiazide diuretics. In the last part of this study, the association between BP reductions and factors affecting BP were tested for each antihypertensive drug. Older patients responded better to alpha blockers. Younger patients responded better to ACEI and ARB. An increase in BMI led to a decreased reduction in patients on ACEI and diuretics (thiazide and non-thiazide). An increase in albumin levels and a decrease in eGFR led to decreases in BP reductions in patients on thiazide diuretics. An increase in eGFR decreased the BP response with ACEI. In conclusion, although a high percentage of hypertensive patients in Scotland persisted with their initial drug prescription, low adherence rates were found with these patients. Approximately half of these patients required three different antihypertensive classes during the 5 years, and 32% of them had resistant HTN. Although this study was observational in nature, the large sample size in this study represented a real HTN population, and the large pharmacy data represented a real antihypertensive population, which were collected through the support of prescription data from the GBPC database. My findings suggest that ACEI, ARB and BB are less likely to require additional therapy. However, ACEI and ARB were better tolerated than BB in that they were more likely to be persistent than BB. In addition, users of ACEI, and ARB have good BP response and low resistant HTN. Linkage patients who participated in these studies with their morbidity and mortality will provide valuable information concerning the effect of adherence on morbidity and mortality and the potential benefits of using ACEI or ARB over other drugs.

Nebivolol Reduces Central Blood Pressure In Stage I Hypertensive Patients: Experimental Single Cohort Study.

Assessment of central blood pressure (BP) has grown substantially over recent years because evidence has shown that central BP is more relevant to cardiovascular outcomes than peripheral BP. Thus, different classes of antihypertensive drugs have different effects on central BP despite similar reductions in brachial BP. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of nebivolol, a β-blocker with vasodilator properties, on the biochemical and hemodynamic parameters of hypertensive patients. Experimental single cohort study conducted in the outpatient clinic of a university hospital. Twenty-six patients were recruited. All of them underwent biochemical and hemodynamic evaluation (BP, heart rate (HR), central BP and augmentation index) before and after 3 months of using nebivolol. 88.5% of the patients were male; their mean age was 49.7 ± 9.3 years and most of them were overweight (29.6 ± 3.1 kg/m2) with large abdominal waist (102.1 ± 7.2 cm). There were significant decreases in peripheral systolic BP (P = 0.0020), diastolic BP (P = 0.0049), HR (P < 0.0001) and central BP (129.9 ± 12.3 versus 122.3 ± 10.3 mmHg; P = 0.0083) after treatment, in comparison with the baseline values. There was no statistical difference in the augmentation index or in the biochemical parameters, from before to after the treatment. Nebivolol use seems to be associated with significant reduction of central BP in stage I hypertensive patients, in addition to reductions in brachial systolic and diastolic BP.

Adipokines: Novel Players In Resistant Hypertension.

Resistant hypertension (RH) is a multifactorial disease, frequently associated with obesity and characterized by blood pressure above goal (140/90 mm Hg) despite the concurrent use of ≥3 antihypertensive drugs of different classes. The mechanisms of obesity-related hypertension include, among others, aldosterone excess and inflammatory adipokines, which have demonstrated a significant role in the pathogenesis of metabolic syndrome and RH. This review aims to summarize recent studies on the role of the adipokines leptin, resistin, and adiponectin in the pathophysiology of RH and target-organ damage associated with this condition. The deregulation of adipokine levels has been associated with clinical characteristics frequently recognized in RH such as diabetes, hyperactivity of sympathetic and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone systems, and vascular and renal damage. Strategies to regulate adipokines may be promising for the management of RH and some clinical implications must be considered when managing controlled and uncontrolled patients with RH.