Search

Background Guidelines recommend that blood pressure (BP) should be lowered in hypertensive patients to prevent cardiovascular accidents. Management of antihypertensive treatment by general practitioners is usually based on office measurements, which may not allow an assessment of BP control over 24 h, which requires ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to be implemented. This is rarely done in general practice, and limited information is available on the consistency between the evaluations of the response to treatment provided by office measurement and by ABPM in this setting.Aim To assess concordance between office BP measurements and ABPM-based estimates of hypertension control in a general practice setting.Design of study Prospective, comparative between techniques.Setting General practice.Methods Seventy-eight general practices, representative of all Italian regions, participated in this study by recruiting sequential hypertensive adults on stabilized treatment, who were subdivided into even groups with office BP, respectively, controlled or noncontrolled by treatment. In each individual, ABPM was applied by the general practitioner after appropriate training, and 24-h ABP values were defined as controlled or not according to current guidelines. Concordance between office and ABPM evaluation of BP control was assessed with kappa statistics. Positive and negative predictive values of office measurement versus ABPM were estimated.Results Between July 2005 and November 2006, 190 general practitioners recruited 2059 hypertensive patients based on office BP measurements; in 1728 patients, a 24-h ABPM was performed, yielding 1524 recordings considered as valid for further analysis. The agreement between the assessment of BP control by office measurement and by ABPM was poor (kappa=0.120), with office measurements showing a satisfactory positive predictive value (0.842) and a poor negative predictive value (0.278); the situation was worse in patients with three or more among the following features: male sex, age of at least 65 years, alcohol consumption, diabetes, and obesity (negative predictive value=0.149).Conclusion In general practice, the agreement between assessment of BP control by treatment provided by office and ambulatory BP measurements is better in patients of 'uncontrolled' office BP than in 'controlled' office BP patients. This emphasizes the need for the larger use of out-of-office BP monitoring in a general practice setting, in particular, in patients considered as 'controlled' during consultation. J Hypertens 28:910-917 (C) 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Background— The degree of pulmonary hypertension in healthy subjects exposed to acute hypobaric hypoxia at high altitude was found to be related to increased plasma endothelin (ET)-1. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of ET-1 antagonism on pulmonary hypertension, renal water, and sodium balance under acute and prolonged exposure to high-altitude–associated hypoxia. Methods and Results— In a double-blind fashion, healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to receive bosentan (62.5 mg for 1 day and 125 mg for the following 2 days; n=10) or placebo (n=10) at sea level and after rapid ascent to high altitude (4559 m). At sea level, bosentan did not induce any significant changes in hemodynamic or renal parameters. At altitude, bosentan induced a significant reduction of systolic pulmonary artery pressure (21±7 versus 31±7 mm Hg, P 2 OCl/glomerular filtration rate) were significantly reduced versus placebo after 2 days of ET-1 antagonism (1100±200 versus 1610±590 mL; −6.7±3.5 versus −1.8±4.8 mL/min, P Conclusions— The present results indicate that the early beneficial effect of ET-1 antagonism on pulmonary blood pressure is followed by an impairment in volume adaptation. These findings must be considered for the prevention and treatment of acute mountain sickness.

A downward titration of antihypertensive drug regimens in summertime is often performed on the basis of seasonal variations of clinic blood pressure (BP). However, little is known about the actual interaction between outdoor air temperature and the effects of antihypertensive treatment on ambulatory BP. The combined effects of aging, treatment, and daily mean temperature on clinic and ambulatory BP were investigated in 6404 subjects referred to our units between October 1999 and December 2003. Office and mean 24-hour systolic BP, as well as morning pressure surge, were significantly lower in hot (>90th percentiles of air temperature; 136±19, 130±14, and 33.3±16.1 mm Hg; P P P P

Drs Dhar and Lambert1 correctly note that the potential relationship between sunlight and seasonal blood pressure (BP) changes is not investigated in our study.2 We agree that this interaction, possibly mediated, at least in part, by changes in brain monoamine concentration, should not be neglected. In addition, the UV-dependent cholecalciferol formation is a potential modifier of …