Resistant hypertension revisited: a comparison of two university-based cohorts.

BACKGROUND: More than a decade ago, we found that a suboptimal medication regimen was the leading cause of resistant hypertension (RH) among patients referred to a tertiary care clinic. Since then, lower blood pressure (BP) goals have been recommended, suggesting that more patients may have RH. To assess whether the reasons for and treatment of RH have changed, we determined the frequency of various causes of resistance, the proportion of patients achieving goal BP, and the changes made in antihypertensive regimens. METHODS: The charts of all new patients seen at the RUSH University Hypertension Center between January 1, 1993, and November 1, 2001, were reviewed for strict criteria for RH: 1) physician referral for uncontrolled hypertension; 2) BP > or =140/90 mmHg despite use of three antihypertensive drugs; and 3) at least one follow-up visit. Patients were followed-up until goal BP was achieved on two consecutive visits or their last visit or until March 2002. RESULTS: Of 1281 patients, 141 met criteria for RH. A cause of resistance was found in 94% of cases, including the following: drug-related causes (58%); nonadherence (16%); psychological causes (9%); office resistance (ie, in-clinic BP readings that were higher than goal despite treatment with antihypertensive medications and despite normotensive BP outside of the clinic as demonstrated by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring) (6%); and secondary hypertension (5%). Overall, 53% of patients had their BP controlled to <140/90 mmHg, largely from regimen optimization and intensification, proper use of diuretics, and on average 4.1 +/- 1 antihypertensive medications (3.7 +/- 0.9 on referral). CONCLUSIONS: These data are strikingly similar to those from our previous study of RH, in which a suboptimal medication regimen was the most common reason for resistance. Goal BP was most commonly achieved after optimizing the diuretic regimen and increasing the number of medications, suggesting that physicians should use these measures to attain the recommended lower BP goals If goal BP is not reached, referral to a clinical hypertension specialist may be appropriate.

Effects of COX inhibition on blood pressure and kidney function in ACE inhibitor-treated blacks and hispanics.

Cyclo-oxygenase (COX) inhibitors attenuate the antihypertensive effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and reduce kidney function. The study tests the hypothesis that these two classes of drugs have similar effects on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and 24-hour blood pressure. The primary endpoint was change in 24-hour systolic blood pressure. Using a randomized crossover design, 25 black and Hispanic hypertensive participants (mean age 58+/-3 years) with osteoarthritis were studied. All participants received an ACE inhibitor at baseline. Once systolic blood pressure was <140 mm Hg, either celecoxib 200 mg/d or diclofenac 75 mg twice daily for 4 weeks was started. After measurements were obtained, all participants underwent a 2-week washout period and crossed over to the other drug for 4 weeks. A significant difference in mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure was noted between groups at 4 weeks (+4.1+/-1.1 mm Hg diclofenac versus +0.6+/-0.6 mm Hg celecoxib; P=0.01). However, because celecoxib has duration of action shorter than 24 hours, we compared ambulatory values at celecoxib trough and peak activities. At peak, no difference in systolic blood pressure was noted between agents (+3.6+/-0.04 mm Hg diclofenac versus +4.2+/-1.9 mm Hg celecoxib; P=0.67). GFR was also differentially affected at 24 hours (-9.9+/-2.4 mL/min diclofenac versus -0.4+/-1.2 mL/min celecoxib; P=0.01). We conclude that diclofenac and celecoxib increase systolic blood pressure at peak levels; however, these agents differ in their 24-hour effects. Differences observed in blood pressure response between COX inhibitors may not be related in their sensitivity but rather their dosing frequency.

Guidelines for hypertension: are quality-assurance measures on target?

Guideline committees recommend targets of treatment based on trial data on efficacy and effectiveness. Quality-assurance initiatives apply these parameters in the general practice setting. Therefore, targets must be feasible and achievable by the practicing physicians who are judged by these targets as goals for care. We evaluated 437 patients in the Rush University Hypertension Clinic using the Health Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS) measures for 2000 to assess goal achievement in a practice-based setting. We compared guideline achievement of uncomplicated hypertensive and diabetic subjects to standards dictated by HEDIS, the 6th Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI), and the American Diabetic Association (ADA)/National Kidney Foundation (NKF). Overall, 276 (63%) patients achieved SBP goal, with 376 (86%) achieving DBP goal and 358 (59%) achieving both goals. However, in the 20% of patients who were diabetic, only 52% had a BP of <140 mm Hg and <90 mm Hg, whereas only 22% achieved the more stringent goals of JNC VI of <130 mm Hg systolic and <85 mm Hg diastolic and only 15% achieved the ADA/NKF goals of <130 mm Hg systolic and <80 mm Hg diastolic. Although goal was achievable in most uncomplicated hypertension, hypertension in diabetes was more difficult to control, despite being more likely to receive enhanced benefit from effective management. Goal-oriented strategy, especially in diabetic subjects, should be aggressively sought rather than relaxing goals to promote achievement.

Goal-oriented hypertension management: translating clinical trials to practice.

Several clinical trials using a blood pressure (BP) treatment algorithm focused on a predetermined goal have achieved better control rates than those of national survey data. These trials reached the Sixth Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI) diastolic blood pressure (DBP) goal of <90 mm Hg in >90% of volunteers and systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal of <140 mm Hg in >60% of volunteers. We evaluated BP control of 437 consecutive patients after at least one year of follow up in a specialist clinic which employed "goal-oriented management," ie, treating to a specific BP goal without a formal drug treatment algorithm, to determine whether JNC VI goals could be achieved. Overall, 276 (63%) patients achieved SBP goal, with 376 (86%) at DBP goal and 358 (59%) at both goals. Only 23% of patients were on monotherapy, with 34% requiring 2 drugs and 37% requiring 3 or more medications. There was no substantial difference in BP control rates among age, gender, and ethnicity subgroups. However, in the 20% of patients who were diabetic, only 52% had a BP of <140 mm Hg and <90 mm Hg, whereas fewer (22% and 15%, respectively) achieved the more stringent goals of JNC VI and the American Diabetic Association (ADA)/National Kidney Foundation (NKF). Goal-oriented management achieved dramatically better control rates than what is reported. Although DBP control was easy to achieve, achieving SBP goal still remained difficult. Employing goal-oriented management can translate BP control results achieved in clinical trials into outpatient practice.