Stephen C. Textor

Resistant Hypertension: Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Professional Education Committee of the Council for High Blood Pressure Research

Resistant hypertension is a common clinical problem faced by both primary care clinicians and specialists. While the exact prevalence of resistant hypertension is unknown, clinical trials suggest that it is not rare, involving perhaps 20% to 30% of study participants. As older age and obesity are 2 of the strongest risk factors for uncontrolled hypertension, the incidence of resistant hypertension will likely increase as the population becomes more elderly and heavier. The prognosis of resistant hypertension is unknown, but cardiovascular risk is undoubtedly increased as patients often have a history of long-standing, severe hypertension complicated by multiple other cardiovascular risk factors such as obesity, sleep apnea, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. The diagnosis of resistant hypertension requires use of good blood pressure technique to confirm persistently elevated blood pressure levels. Pseudoresistance, including lack of blood pressure control secondary to poor medication adherence or white coat hypertension, must be excluded. Resistant hypertension is almost always multifactorial in etiology. Successful treatment requires identification and reversal of lifestyle factors contributing to treatment resistance; diagnosis and appropriate treatment of secondary causes of hypertension; and use of effective multidrug regimens. As a subgroup, patients with resistant hypertension have not been widely studied. Observational assessments have allowed for identification of demographic and lifestyle characteristics associated with resistant hypertension, and the role of secondary causes of hypertension in promoting treatment resistance is well documented; however, identification of broader mechanisms of treatment resistance is lacking. In particular, attempts to elucidate potential genetic causes of resistant hypertension have been limited. Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of resistant hypertension remain largely empiric due to the lack of systematic assessments of 3 or 4 drug combinations. Studies of resistant hypertension are limited by the high cardiovascular risk of patients within this subgroup, which generally precludes safe withdrawal of medications; the presence of multiple disease processes (eg, sleep apnea, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic disease) and their associated medical therapies, which confound interpretation of study results; and the difficulty in enrolling large numbers of study participants. Expanding our understanding of the causes of resistant hypertension and thereby potentially allowing for more effective prevention and/or treatment will be essential to improve the long-term clinical management of this disorder.

Incidence and Prognostic Importance of Acute Renal Failure After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background—In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the modern era, the incidence and prognostic implications of acute renal failure (ARF) are unknown. Methods and Results—With a retrospective analysis of the Mayo Clinic PCI registry, we determined the incidence of, risk factors for, and prognostic implications of ARF (defined as an increase in serum creatinine [Cr] >0.5 mg/dL from baseline) after PCI. Of 7586 patients, 254 (3.3%) experienced ARF. Among patients with baseline Cr <2.0, the risk of ARF was higher among diabetic than nondiabetic patients, whereas among those with a baseline Cr >2.0, all had a significant risk of ARF. In multivariate analysis, ARF was associated with baseline serum Cr, acute myocardial infarction, shock, and volume of contrast medium administered. Twenty-two percent of patients with ARF died during the index hospitalization compared with only 1.4% of patients without ARF (P <0.0001). After adjustment, ARF remained strongly associated with death. Among hospital survivors with ARF, 1- and 5-year estimated mortality rates were 12.1% and 44.6%, respectively, much greater than the 3.7% and 14.5% mortality rates in patients without ARF (P <0.0001). Conclusions—The overall incidence of ARF after PCI is low. Diabetic patients with baseline Cr values <2.0 mg/dL are at higher risk than nondiabetic patients, whereas all patients with a serum Cr >2.0 are at high risk for ARF. ARF was highly correlated with death during the index hospitalization and after dismissal.

Renal-artery stenosis.

Renal artery stenosis (RAS) can accelerate or generate progressive hypertension and renal dysfunction. The goals for treating patients with RAS are to reduce cardiovascu-lar morbidity and mortality attributable to elevated arterial pressure and to preserve renal function beyond critical stenosis. Recent, randomized trials with current anti-hypertensive agents indicate that many patients with RAS can be managed for years without renal artery revascularization. As it does elsewhere, atherosclerotic disease can progress to more severe occlusion in the renal arteries. Rapid advances in endo-vascular techniques, including stenting, make restoration of renal blood flow possible in more patients than before. Therapeutic goals are achieved by 1) avoidance of tobacco, 2) reducing arterial pressure with antihypertensive drug therapy, particularly those agents capable of blocking the renin-angiotensin system, and 3) renal revascu-larization, using balloon angioplasty and stent placement, surgical bypass, or endart-erectomy. The major clinical challenges are to identify progressive occlusive disease and to determine appropriate timing for vascular intervention.

Resistant Hypertension: Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment. A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Professional Education Committee of the Council for High Blood Pressure Research

Resistant hypertension is a common clinical problem faced by both primary care clinicians and specialists. While the exact prevalence of resistant hypertension is unknown, clinical trials suggest that it is not rare, involving perhaps 20% to 30% of study participants. As older age and obesity are 2 of the strongest risk factors for uncontrolled hypertension, the incidence of resistant hypertension will likely increase as the population becomes more elderly and heavier. The prognosis of resistant hypertension is unknown, but cardiovascular risk is undoubtedly increased as patients often have a history of long-standing, severe hypertension complicated by multiple other cardiovascular risk factors such as obesity, sleep apnea, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. The diagnosis of resistant hypertension requires use of good blood pressure technique to confirm persistently elevated blood pressure levels. Pseudoresistance, including lack of blood pressure control secondary to poor medication adherence or white coat hypertension, must be excluded. Resistant hypertension is almost always multifactorial in etiology. Successful treatment requires identification and reversal of lifestyle factors contributing to treatment resistance; diagnosis and appropriate treatment of secondary causes of hypertension; and use of effective multidrug regimens. As a subgroup, patients with resistant hypertension have not been widely studied. Observational assessments have allowed for identification of demographic and lifestyle characteristics associated with resistant hypertension, and the role of secondary causes of hypertension in promoting treatment resistance is well documented; however, identification of broader mechanisms of treatment resistance is lacking. In particular, attempts to elucidate potential genetic causes of resistant hypertension have been limited. Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of resistant hypertension remain largely empiric due to the lack of systematic assessments of 3 or 4 drug combinations. Studies of resistant hypertension are limited by the high cardiovascular risk of patients within this subgroup, which generally precludes safe withdrawal of medications; the presence of multiple disease processes (eg, sleep apnea, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic disease) and their associated medical therapies, which confound interpretation of study results; and the difficulty in enrolling large numbers of study participants. Expanding our understanding of the causes of resistant hypertension and thereby potentially allowing for more effective prevention and/or treatment will be essential to improve the long-term clinical management of this disorder.

Resistant Hypertension: Comparing Hemodynamic Management to Specialist Care

Although resistant hypertension affects a minority of all hypertensives, this group continues to experience disproportionately high cardiovascular event rates despite newer antihypertensive agents. Hypertension represents an imbalance of hemodynamic forces within the circulation, usually characterized by elevated systemic vascular resistance. We studied the utility of serial hemodynamic parameters in the selection and titration of antihypertensive medication in resistant hypertensive patients using highly reproducible noninvasive measurements by thoracic bioimpedance. Resistant hypertension patients (n=104) were randomized to drug selection based either on serial hemodynamic (HD) measurements and a predefined algorithm or on drug selection directed by a hypertension specialist (SC) in a 3-month intensive treatment program. Blood pressure was lowered by intensified drug therapy in both treatment groups (169±3/87±2 to 139±2/72±1 mm Hg HD versus 173±3/91±2 to 147±2/79±1 mm Hg SC, P <0.01 for systolic and diastolic BP), using similar numbers and intensity of antihypertensive medications. Blood pressures were reduced further for those treated according to hemodynamic measurements, resulting in improved control rates (56% HD versus 33% SC controlled to ≤140/90 mm Hg, P <0.05) and incremental reduction in systemic vascular resistance measurements. Although the number of patients taking diuretics did not differ between groups, final diuretic dosage was higher in the hemodynamic cohort. Our results demonstrate superior blood pressure control using a treatment algorithm and serial hemodynamic measurements compared with clinical judgment alone in a randomized prospective study. Our measurements of thoracic fluid volume support occult volume expansion as a mediator of antihypertensive drug resistance and use of impedance measurements to guide advancing diuretic dose and adjustment of multidrug antihypertensive treatment.

Complete avoidance of calcineurin inhibitors in renal transplantation : A randomized trial comparing sirolimus and tacrolimus

Calcineurin inhibitors have decreased acute rejection and improved early renal allograft survival, but their use has been implicated in the development of chronic nephrotoxicity. We performed a prospective, randomized trial in kidney transplantation comparing sirolimus‐MMF‐prednisone to tacrolimus‐MMF‐prednisone. Eighty‐one patients in the sirolimus group and 84 patients in the tacrolimus group were enrolled (mean follow‐up = 33 months; range 13–47 months). At 1 year, patient survival was similar in the groups (98% with sirolimus, 96% with tacrolimus; p = 0.42) as was graft survival (94% sirolimus vs. 92% tacrolimus, p = 0.95). The incidence of clinical acute rejection was 10% in the tacrolimus group and 13% in the sirolimus group (p = 0.58). There was no difference in mean GFR measured by iothalamate clearance between the tacrolimus and sirolimus groups at 1 year (61 ± 19 mL/min vs. 63 ± 18 mL/min, p = 0.57) or 2 years (61 ± 17 mL/min vs. 61 ± 19 mL/min, p = 0.84). At 1 year, chronicity using the Banff schema showed no difference in interstitial, tubular or glomerular changes, but fewer chronic vascular changes in the sirolimus group. This study shows that a CNI‐free regimen using sirolimus‐MMF‐prednisone produces similar acute rejection rates, graft survival and renal function 1–2 years after transplantation compared to tacrolimus‐MMF‐prednisone.

Renovascular Hypertension and Ischemic Nephropathy

Major improvements in imaging, medical therapy, and techniques of renal revascularization have changed the landscape of renovascular disease during the past decade. This has been particularly true for atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis, which remains one of the most common conditions known to accelerate hypertension and one of the most common incidentally detected vascular lesions. Despite, or perhaps because of, these developments, few clinical questions provoke more controversy and debate among cardiologists, internists, and nephrologists than decisions about the optimal management of patients with main renal artery stenosis. Even well-informed clinicians from different subspecialties hold widely divergent opinions about the role of renal revascularization, particularly for atherosclerotic disease. Studies of Medicare claims data indicate that application of peripheral intervention procedures varies >14-fold between various parts of the country.1 Some of those from interventional subspecialties (primarily interventional radiology and cardiology) emphasize the major benefits now available from endovascular procedures, including the use of stents. They argue that revascularization offers the potential to improve or reverse renovascular hypertension, to salvage or preserve the renal circulation and renal function, and to improve the management of patients with refractory forms of congestive heart failure.2 A recent review of the use of percutaneous renal artery procedures among Medicare beneficiaries confirms a rise from 7660 claims in 1996 to 18 520 claims in 2000, primarily because of a 2.8-fold increase in procedures by interventional cardiologists.3 Many in the nephrology community review the same published literature and reach nearly opposite conclusions. They argue that recent prospective studies fail to reveal major benefits of blood pressure control related to renal revascularization, that the risks of complications from interventional procedures are substantial, including uncommon but sometimes devastating loss of renal function resulting from atheroembolic disease.4 Despite a wave of enthusiasm in the early 1990s to identify …

Overcoming a Positive Crossmatch in Living‐Donor Kidney Transplantation

Many patients who have an otherwise acceptable living‐kidney donor do not undergo transplantation because of the presence of antibodies against the donor cells resulting in a positive crossmatch. In the current study, 14 patients with a positive cytotoxic crossmatch (titer ≤ 1 : 16) against their living donor underwent a regimen including pretransplant plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, rituximab and splenectomy. Eleven of 14 grafts (79%) are functioning well 30–600 days after transplantation. Two grafts were lost to accelerated vasculopathy and one was lost to death with good function. No hyperacute or cellular rejections occurred. Antibody‐mediated rejection occurred in six patients [two clinical (14%) and four subclinical (29%)] and was reversible with plasmapheresis and steroids. Our results suggest that selected crossmatch‐positive patients can be transplanted successfully with living‐donor kidney allografts, using a protocol of pretransplant plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, rituximab and splenectomy. Longer follow‐up will be needed, but the absence of anti‐donor antibody and good early outcomes are encouraging.

The association between age and nephrosclerosis on renal biopsy among healthy adults.

BACKGROUND Chronic kidney disease is common with older age and is characterized on renal biopsy by global glomerulosclerosis, tubular atrophy, interstitial fibrosis, and arteriosclerosis. OBJECTIVE To see whether the prevalence of these histologic abnormalities in the kidney increases with age in healthy adults and whether histologic findings are explained by age-related differences in kidney function or chronic kidney disease risk factors. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. SETTING Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, from 1999 to 2009. PATIENTS 1203 adult living kidney donors. MEASUREMENTS Core-needle biopsy of the renal cortex obtained during surgical implantation of the kidney, and medical record data of kidney function and risk factors obtained before donation. RESULTS The prevalence of nephrosclerosis (> or =2 chronic histologic abnormalities) was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.1% to 6.7%) for patients aged 18 to 29 years, 16% (CI, 12% to 20%) for patients aged 30 to 39 years, 28% (CI, 24% to 32%) for patients aged 40 to 49 years, 44% (CI, 38% to 50%) for patients aged 50 to 59 years, 58% (CI, 47% to 67%) for patients aged 60 to 69 years, and 73% (CI, 43% to 90%) for patients aged 70 to 77 years. Adjustment for kidney function and risk factor covariates did not explain the age-related increase in the prevalence of nephrosclerosis. LIMITATION Kidney donors are selected for health and lack the spectrum or severity of renal pathologic findings in the general population. CONCLUSION Kidney function and chronic kidney disease risk factors do not explain the strong association between age and nephrosclerosis in healthy adults. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE National Institutes of Health, U.S. Public Health Service.

Incidental Renal Artery Stenosis Among a Prospective Cohort of Hypertensive Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography

OBJECTIVE To determine the feasibility, safety, and clinical yield of angiographic screening among hypertensive patients undergoing coronary angiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS This study was a prospective cohort analysis of hypertensive patients who underwent cardiac catheterization at a tertiary care referral center from July 1998 to March 1999. Abdominal aortography was performed to screen for renal artery stenosis, the percentage of which was measured. RESULTS The mean +/- SD age of the 297 study patients was 64.9+/-10.2 years; 58.6% were male, and 98.0% were white. Mean +/- SD systolic/diastolic blood pressure was 142.8+/-22.5/79.6+/-11.4 mm Hg. Aortography required a mean incremental dose of 62+/-9 mL of nonionic contrast agent. No complications were attributable to aortography. Of 680 renal arteries, 611 (90%) were visualized adequately. Also, 53% of patients had normal renal arteries, 28% had stenoses less than 50%, and 19.2% had stenoses of 50% or more. Renal artery stenosis was bilateral in 3.7% of patients and high grade (>70% stenosis) in 7%. Patients with renal artery stenosis were more likely to have had a previous coronary intervention. In multivariate analysis, systolic blood pressure (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-138; P=.02), history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.27-5.78; P=.01), and cancer (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.02-3.82; P=.04) independently correlated with renal artery stenosis of 50% or more. CONCLUSION The prevalence of incidental renal artery stenosis among hypertensive patients undergoing coronary catheterization is significant. Therefore, screening abdominal aortography should be considered in these patients to better define their risk of cardiovascular complications.