Joseph L. Izzo

Treatment of Hypertension in the Prevention and Management of Ischemic Heart Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Council for High Blood Pressure Research and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Epidemiology and Prevention

Epidemiological studies have established a strong association between hypertension and coronary artery disease (CAD). Hypertension is a major independent risk factor for the development of CAD, stroke, and renal failure. The optimal choice of antihypertensive agents remains controversial, and there are only partial answers to important questions in the treatment of hypertension in the prevention and management of ischemic heart disease (IHD), such as: ● What are the appropriate systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) targets in patients at high risk of developing CAD or in those with established CAD? ● Are the beneficial effects of treatment simply a function of blood pressure (BP) lowering, or do particular classes of drugs have uniquely protective actions in addition to lowering BP? ● Are there antihypertensive drugs that have shown particular efficacy in the primary and secondary prevention of IHD? ● Which antihypertensive drugs should be used in patients who have established CAD with stable or unstable angina pectoris, in those with non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and in those with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)?

Olmesartan for the delay or prevention of microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND Microalbuminuria is an early predictor of diabetic nephropathy and premature cardiovascular disease. We investigated whether treatment with an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) would delay or prevent the occurrence of microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and normoalbuminuria. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, controlled trial, we assigned 4447 patients with type 2 diabetes to receive olmesartan (at a dose of 40 mg once daily) or placebo for a median of 3.2 years. Additional antihypertensive drugs (except angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors or ARBs) were used as needed to lower blood pressure to less than 130/80 mm Hg. The primary outcome was the time to the first onset of microalbuminuria. The times to the onset of renal and cardiovascular events were analyzed as secondary end points. RESULTS The target blood pressure (<130/80 mm Hg) was achieved in nearly 80% of the patients taking olmesartan and 71% taking placebo; blood pressure measured in the clinic was lower by 3.1/1.9 mm Hg in the olmesartan group than in the placebo group. Microalbuminuria developed in 8.2% of the patients in the olmesartan group (178 of 2160 patients who could be evaluated) and 9.8% in the placebo group (210 of 2139); the time to the onset of microalbuminuria was increased by 23% with olmesartan (hazard ratio for onset of microalbuminuria, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.63 to 0.94; P=0.01). The serum creatinine level doubled in 1% of the patients in each group. Slightly fewer patients in the olmesartan group than in the placebo group had nonfatal cardiovascular events--81 of 2232 patients (3.6%) as compared with 91 of 2215 patients (4.1%) (P=0.37)--but a greater number had fatal cardiovascular events--15 patients (0.7%) as compared with 3 patients (0.1%) (P=0.01), a difference that was attributable in part to a higher rate of death from cardiovascular causes in the olmesartan group than in the placebo group among patients with preexisting coronary heart disease (11 of 564 patients [2.0%] vs. 1 of 540 [0.2%], P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS Olmesartan was associated with a delayed onset of microalbuminuria, even though blood-pressure control in both groups was excellent according to current standards. The higher rate of fatal cardiovascular events with olmesartan among patients with preexisting coronary heart disease is of concern. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00185159.).

Importance of Systolic Blood Pressure in Older Americans

This clinical advisory statement from the Coordinating Committee of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program is intended to advance and clarify the recommendations of the Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI, 1997).1 The advisory addresses several interrelated issues about blood pressure (BP) that affect people approaching the later decades of life. On the basis of the wealth of currently available evidence, the committee now recommends a major paradigm shift in urging that systolic BP become the major criterion for diagnosis, staging, and therapeutic management of hypertension, particularly in middle-aged and older Americans. Several lines of strong evidence support the initiative to emphasize systolic BP. Pathophysiologically, there are strong associations among aging, increased stiffness of large arteries, increased systolic BP, increased pulse pressure, and the prevalence of cardiac and vascular disease. Epidemiologically, isolated systolic hypertension is the most common form of hypertension and is present in approximately two thirds of hypertensive individuals >60 years of age. Diagnostically, classification and staging of hypertension are more precise when systolic rather than diastolic BP is used as the principal criterion. Risk stratification for major complications of hypertension (stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and kidney failure) is actually confounded by the use of diastolic BP; in older people with systolic hypertension, diastolic BP is inversely related to cardiovascular risk. Clinical benefits of treatment of isolated systolic hypertension include reductions in stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, kidney failure, and overall cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality. Currently, only 1 in 4 Americans with hypertension falls below JNC VI–recommended values of 140/90 mm Hg in uncomplicated hypertension or 130/85 mm Hg in individuals with kidney disease or diabetes. Hypertension control rates are poorest in older people, primarily as a result of inadequate …

Influence of age, risk factors, and cardiovascular and renal disease on arterial stiffness: Clinical applications

Age is the main clinical determinant of large artery stiffness. Central arteries stiffen progressively with age, whereas peripheral muscular arteries change little with age. A number of clinical studies have analyzed the effects of age on aortic stiffness. Increase of central artery stiffness with age is responsible for earlier wave reflections and changes in pressure wave contours. The stiffening of aorta and other central arteries is a potential risk factor for increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Arterial stiffening with aging is accompanied by an elevation in systolic blood pressure (BP) and pulse pressure (PP). Although arterial stiffening with age is a common situation, it has now been confirmed that older subjects with increased arterial stiffness and elevated PP have higher cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Increase in aortic stiffness with age occurs gradually and continuously, similarly for men and women. Cross-sectional studies have shown that aortic and carotid stiffness (evaluated by the pulse wave velocity) increase with age by approximately 10% to 15% during a period of 10 years. Women always have 5% to 10% lower stiffness than men of the same age. Although large artery stiffness increases with age independently of the presence of cardiovascular risk factors or other associated conditions, the extent of this increase may depend on several environmental or genetic factors. Hypertension may increase arterial stiffness, especially in older subjects. Among other cardiovascular risk factors, diabetes type 1 and 2 accelerates arterial stiffness, whereas the role of dyslipidemia and tobacco smoking is unclear. Arterial stiffness is also present in several cardiovascular and renal diseases. Patients with heart failure, end stage renal disease, and those with atherosclerotic lesions often develop central artery stiffness. Decreased carotid distensibility, increased arterial thickness, and presence of calcifications and plaques often coexist in the same subject. However, relationships between these three alterations of the arterial wall remain to be explored.

Determinants of Elevated Pulse Pressure in Middle-Aged and Older Subjects With Uncomplicated Systolic Hypertension The Role of Proximal Aortic Diameter and the Aortic Pressure-Flow Relationship

Background—Elevated pulse pressure (PP) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk and is thought to be secondary to elastin fragmentation with secondary collagen deposition and stiffening of the aortic wall, leading to a dilated, noncompliant vasculature. Methods and Results—By use of calibrated tonometry and pulsed Doppler, arterial stiffness and pulsatile hemodynamics were assessed in 128 subjects with uncomplicated systolic hypertension (supine systolic pressure ≥140 mm Hg off medication) and 30 normotensive control subjects of comparable age and gender. Pulse-wave velocity was assessed from tonometry and body surface measurements. Characteristic impedance (Zc) was calculated from the ratio of change in carotid pressure and aortic flow in early systole. Effective aortic diameter was assessed by use of the water hammer equation. Hypertensives were heavier (P <0.001) and had higher PP (P <0.001), which was attributable primarily to higher Zc (P <0.001), especially in women. Pulse-wave velocity was higher in hypertensives (P =0.001); however, this difference was not significant after adjustment for differences in mean arterial pressure (MAP) (P >0.153), whereas increased Zc remained highly significant (P <0.001). Increased Zc in women and in hypertensive men was attributable to decreased effective aortic diameter, with no difference in wall stiffness at comparable MAP and body weight. Conclusions—Elevated PP in systolic hypertension was independent of MAP and was attributable primarily to elevated Zc and reduced effective diameter of the proximal aorta. These findings are not consistent with the hypothesis of secondary aortic degeneration, dilation, and wall stiffening but rather suggest that aortic function may play an active role in the pathophysiology of systolic hypertension.

Omapatrilat Reduces Pulse Pressure and Proximal Aortic Stiffness in Patients With Systolic Hypertension

Background— Increased pulse pressure, an indicator of conduit vessel stiffness, is a strong independent predictor of cardiovascular events in hypertensive cohorts, which suggests that reduction of conduit vessel stiffness may be desirable in hypertension. Methods and Results— We assessed changes in pulse pressure and conduit vessel stiffness in a 12-week double-blind, randomized clinical trial that compared monotherapy with the ACE inhibitor enalapril 40 mg daily (n=87) versus the vasopeptidase (dual ACE and neutral endopeptidase) inhibitor omapatrilat 80 mg daily (n=80) in patients with systolic hypertension. Patients were withdrawn from antihypertensive medications 1 to 2 weeks before enrollment, and systolic pressure was confirmed to be ≥160 mm Hg. With the use of calibrated tonometry and pulsed Doppler, pulsatile hemodynamics were assessed before randomization and at 12 weeks. Characteristic impedance (Zc), a direct measure of the stiffness of the central aorta, was calculated from the ratio of change...

Expanding the Definition and Classification of Hypertension

Cardiovascular abnormalities are frequently the cause, as well as the effect, of elevated blood pressure. As such, early cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be established before identifiable blood pressure thresholds are crossed. To identify individuals at risk for CVD at an earlier point in the disease process, as well as to avoid labeling persons as hypertensive who are at low risk for CVD, the Hypertension Writing Group proposes incorporating the presence or absence of cardiovascular risk factors, early disease markers, and target organ damage into the definition and classification scheme of hypertension. To describe both the complexity and progressive nature of hypertension, the following definition is proposed: “Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular syndrome arising from complex and interrelated etiologies. Early markers of the syndrome are often present before blood pressure elevation is observed; therefore, hypertension cannot be classified solely by discrete blood pressure thresholds. Progression is strongly associated with functional and structural cardiac and vascular abnormalities that damage the heart, kidneys, brain, vasculature, and other organs and lead to premature morbidity and death.” Classification of hypertension must involve assessing global cardiovascular risk to situate an individuals risk for CVD and events along a continuum. As knowledge of early CVD continues to evolve, the approach to classifying individuals along that continuum can be expected to evolve accordingly. The four categories currently used to classify hypertension are normal, prehypertension, and stages 1 and 2 hypertension. The population identified with prehypertension includes a subgroup with early CVD. We believe it would be preferable to classify all individuals as either normal or hypertensive, based on their cardiovascular evaluation, using the four categories of normal and stages 1, 2, and 3 hypertension.

Aortic Diameter, Wall Stiffness, and Wave Reflection in Systolic Hypertension

Systolic hypertension is associated with increased pulse pressure (PP) and increased risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However the pathogenesis of increased PP remains controversial. One hypothesis suggests that aortic dilatation, wall stiffening and increased pulse wave velocity result from elastin fragmentation, leading to a premature reflected pressure wave that contributes to elevated PP. An alternative hypothesis suggests that increased proximal aortic stiffness and reduced aortic diameter leads to mismatch between pressure and flow, giving rise to an increased forward pressure wave and increased PP. To evaluate these two hypotheses, we measured pulsatile hemodynamics and proximal aortic diameter directly using tonometry, ultrasound imaging, and Doppler in 167 individuals with systolic hypertension. Antihypertensive medications were withdrawn for at least 1 week before study. Patients with PP above the median (75 mm Hg) had lower aortic diameter (2.94±0.36 versus 3.13±0.28 cm, P<0.001) and higher aortic wall stiffness (elastance-wall stiffness product: 16.1±0.7 versus 15.7±0.7 ln[dyne/cm], P<0.001) with no difference in augmentation index (19.9±10.4 versus 17.5±10.0%, P=0.12). Aortic diameter and wall stiffness both increased with advancing age (P<0.001). However, an inverse relation between PP and aortic diameter remained significant (P<0.001) in models that adjusted for age, sex, height, and weight and then further adjusted for aortic wall stiffness, augmentation index, and mean arterial pressure. Among individuals with systolic hypertension, increased PP is primarily attributable to increased wall stiffness and reduced aortic diameter rather than premature wave reflection.

Arterial stiffness and the systolic hypertension syndrome.

Purpose of review This review is intended to provide the background for a new comprehensive hemodynamic view of the syndrome of systolic or wide pulse pressure hypertension and its hallmark abnormality: increased central arterial stiffness. Recent findings Studies of the pathogenesis of systolic hypertension have lagged. This review describes the systolic hypertension syndrome as a complex set of hemodynamic maladaptations that include stiff central arteries, normal peripheral arteries with variable pressure amplification characteristics, arteriolar constriction, microcirculatory rarefaction, metabolic abnormalities, cardiac hypertrophy, and increased blood pressure variability. Because the structural and functional properties of arteries of different caliber are highly heterogeneous and vary with aging and disease, simple measurements such as standard brachial artery blood pressure, brachial pulse pressure, or mean arterial pressure are inadequate to provide meaningful insight into the pathophysiology of the syndrome. Additional parameters developed to describe changes in arterial mechanics (arterial compliance or stiffness, elastic modulus, impedance, pulse wave velocity, augmentation index, and pulse pressure amplification) are intrinsically limited and are directly or indirectly pressure-dependent. Quantitation of central arterial stiffness provides a modest increment in cardiovascular and renal risk stratification. Summary Better clinical management of systolic hypertension depends on greater insight into the syndrome as a whole, more critical analysis of existing techniques, and the development of new approaches.

Preventing microalbuminuria in patients with diabetes: rationale and design of the Randomised Olmesartan and Diabetes Microalbuminuria Prevention (ROADMAP) study.

Diabetic nephropathy has developed into a worldwide epidemic and is responsible for the majority of end-stage renal disease in most countries. Antihypertensive treatment slows the progression of the disease. In addition, blockade of the renin–angiotensin system reduces the degree of albuminuria and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have been shown to delay the progression from microalbuminuria to overt proteinuria in patients with diabetes. However, few studies have examined whether the initial stage of diabetic nephropathy (i.e. the development of microalbuminuria) in patients with type 2 diabetes can be slowed or prevented by ARB treatment. The Randomised Olmesartan And Diabetes MicroAlbuminuria Prevention (ROADMAP) study is a placebo-controlled, multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study investigating the effect of the ARB, olmesartan medoxomil, on the incidence of microalbuminuria. A total of 4400 type 2 diabetes patients with normoalbuminuria will be randomized to treatment with 40 mg of olmesartan medoxomil once daily or placebo. Goal blood pressure will be 130/80 mmHg. The primary endpoint of the study is the occurrence of microalbuminuria. In ROADMAP, we will also assess as secondary endpoints the effects of olmesartan on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes. In addition, within subgroups of the ROADMAP patients, the effects of olmesartan on retinopathy and other microvascular circulations will be analysed. The study is expected to last a median of 5 years. The ROADMAP study will answer the question whether an ARB can prevent or delay the onset of microalbuminuria and whether this translates into protection against cardiovascular events and renal disease.