Search

Background: Blood pressure (BP) control is important in chronic kidney disease (CKD), but a reduction in brachial BP may not mirror changes in central aortic BP (cBP) during antihypertensive medication. We hypothesize that a fall in cBP is better reflected during enhanced vasodilation treatment (EVT) compared with reduced vasodilation treatment (RVT) because of different hemodynamic actions of these interventions., Methods: Eighty-one hypertensive CKD stage 3-4 patients (mean measured glomerular filtration rate 36 ml/min per 1.73 m2) were randomized to either EVT based on renin--angiotensin blockade and/or amlodipine or RVT based on nonvasodilating β-blockade (metoprolol). Before randomization and following 18 months of treatment, we performed 24-h ambulatory BP measurements (ABPM) and radial artery pulse wave analysis for estimation of cBP and augmentation index (AIx). Forearm resistance (Rrest) was determined by venous occlusion plethysmography and arterial stiffness by carotid--femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV). Matched healthy controls were studied once for comparison., Results: Compared with controls, CKD patients had elevated ABPM, cBP and PWV. Although ABPM remained unchanged from baseline to follow-up in both treatment groups, cBP decreased 4.7/2.9 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) during EVT and increased 5.1/1.5 mmHg during RVT (Δ=9.8/4.4 mmHg, P=0.02 for SBP, P = 0.05 for DBP). At follow-up, the difference between systolic cBP and 24-h ABPM (ΔBPsyst) was negatively associated with heart rate and positively associated with AIx and Rrest (all P < 0.01) but not PWV (P = 0.32)., Conclusion: In CKD patients, EVT and RVT have opposite effects on cBP and the difference between cBP and ambulatory BP is larger for EVT than RVT., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) may be accelerated by tissue hypoxia due to impaired blood supply. This could be induced by small artery narrowing resulting in abnormally high intrarenal vascular resistance (RVR). We investigated whether a reduction in RVR achieved by adding vasodilating medical therapy (AVT) is superior to adding nonvasodilating medical therapy (AnonVT) regarding tissue oxygenation and preservation of kidney function., Methods: Eighty-three grade 3 and 4 CKD patients [estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) 34.6 ml/min per 1.73 m] were randomized to either AVT with amlodipine and/or renin angiotensin blockade or AnonVT with the nonvasodilating beta-blocker metoprolol. Investigations were performed at baseline and after 18 months of therapy. Systemic vasodilation was documented in the forearm vasculature using resting venous occlusion plethysmography. GFR was measured as Chrome-EDTA plasma clearance. Using MRI, renal artery blood flow was measured for calculation of RVR and for estimating renal oxygenation (R2*)., Results: AVT and AnonVT achieved as planned similar blood pressure levels throughout the study. At follow-up, resistance had decreased by 7% (P < 0.05) and RVR by 12% (P < 0.05) in the AVT group, whereas in the AnonVT group, resistance increased by 39% (P < 0.01), whereas RVR remained unchanged. At follow-up, no significant differences in cortical or medullary R2* values between AVT and AnonVT were observed, and the GFR decline was similar in the two groups (3.0 vs. 3.3 ml/min per 1.73 m)., Conclusion: Long-term intensified vasodilation treatment reduced peripheral and RVR, but this was not associated with improvement of R2* or protection against loss of kidney function in CKD patients.

Background: Renal denervation (RDN), treating resistant hypertension, has, in open trial design, been shown to lower blood pressure (BP) dramatically, but this was primarily with respect to office BP., Method: We conducted a SHAM-controlled, double-blind, randomized, single-center trial to establish efficacy data based on 24-h ambulatory BP measurements (ABPM). Inclusion criteria were daytime systolic ABPM at least 145 mmHg following 1 month of stable medication and 2 weeks of compliance registration. All RDN procedures were carried out by an experienced operator using the unipolar Medtronic Flex catheter (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California, USA)., Results: We randomized 69 patients with treatment-resistant hypertension to RDN (n = 36) or SHAM (n = 33). Groups were well balanced at baseline. Mean baseline daytime systolic ABPM was 159 ± 12 mmHg (RDN) and 159 ± 14 mmHg (SHAM). Groups had similar reductions in daytime systolic ABPM compared with baseline at 3 months [-6.2 ± 18.8 mmHg (RDN) vs. -6.0 ± 13.5 mmHg (SHAM)] and at 6 months [-6.1 ± 18.9 mmHg (RDN) vs. -4.3 ± 15.1 mmHg (SHAM)]. Mean usage of antihypertensive medication (daily defined doses) at 3 months was equal [6.8 ± 2.7 (RDN) vs. 7.0 ± 2.5 (SHAM)].RDN performed at a single center and by a high-volume operator reduced ABPM to the same level as SHAM treatment and thus confirms the result of the HTN3 trial., Conclusion: Further, clinical use of RDN for treatment of resistant hypertension should await positive results from double-blinded, SHAM-controlled trials with multipolar ablation catheters or novel denervation techniques.

Aim: Young individuals genetically predisposed for essential hypertension have increased renal vascular resistance. We evaluated whether 1 year of angiotensin II receptor blockade decreases afferent arteriolar resistance (RA) and induces a sustained blood pressure (BP) reduction during a 10-year follow-up period in offspring of parents both diagnosed with essential hypertension., Methods: Based on renal plasma flow (p-aminohippurate clearance) and glomerular filtration rate (Cr-EDTA clearance) RA was calculated according to the model originally established by Gomez. Following baseline measurements, the participants (n = 110, mean age 30 years) were randomly allocated to 12 months of treatment with either candesartan or placebo followed by repetition of measurements and withdrawal of medication. Four-hour ambulatory BP (ABP) was recorded at baseline, by end of active treatment and after 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 years. ABP was analyzed according to RA achieved at the end of active treatment., Results: Candesartan reduced RA by 14% (P < 0.01). Ten years posttreatment systolic ABP increased by 2.1 mmHg (P = 0.04) and diastolic by 4.2 mmHg (P < 0.01) compared with baseline, without any difference between treatment arms. A high posttreatment RA was associated with higher BP levels during follow-up, but long-term alterations in 24-h BP were similar in participants with low and high RA and not different between treatment arms., Conclusion: RA is associated with 24-h BP levels, but temporary lowering of BP and RA by candesartan does not prevent BP from increasing further. Prevention of hypertension appears not feasible by short-term inhibition of the rennin-angiotensin system in young adults.

Objective: Structural changes of small resistance arteries occur early in the disease process of essential hypertension and predict cardiovascular events in previously untreated patients. We investigated whether on-treatment small artery structure also identifies patients at elevated risk despite normalization of blood pressure (BP)., Methods: We conducted a long-term follow-up survey of cardiovascular events in 134 moderate-risk patients with 9-12 months of well treated essential hypertension. All participants underwent subcutaneous biopsies with determination of small artery structure in terms of media to lumen ratio (M : L) before and during treatment., Results: After 9-12 months of treatment SBP was lowered from 164 ± 15 to 134 ± 14 mmHg (P < 0.01) and M : L reduced from 0.084 ± 0.028 to 0.075 ± 0.024 (P < 0.01). Mean follow-up hereafter was 15 years representing a total of 2035 years for the entire cohort. During this period 47 patients suffered a predefined cardiovascular event. For patients with on-treatment M : L above the mean value of the cohort (≥0.075), the hazard ratio was 2.14 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-3.84, P = 0.01] and also those with M : L above mean +2SD of a normotensive population (≥0.098) had an elevated risk (hazard ratio 2.99, 95% CI 1.60-5.58, P < 0.01). Both results were adjusted for heart score (a 10-year mortality risk estimate integrating age, sex, smoking status, cholesterol level and SBP). Analysis of changes in M : L during treatment showed significantly higher event rates among patients with increased M : L and vice versa (hazard ratio 1.36 per 25% change, 95% CI 1.07-1.73, P = 0.013)., Conclusion: On-treatment small artery structure identifies individuals still at increased cardiovascular risk despite long-term BP normalization and may be an additional target for therapy to prevent cardiovascular events.

Correction of structural abnormalities in resistance arteries of patients with essential hypertension is a potential treatment goal, in addition to blood pressure reduction. However, available evidence from human as well as from animal studies indicates that antihypertensive therapy is not always accompanied by normalization of resistance vessel structure, despite normalization of blood pressure. Thus, blood pressure is not the only factor determining resistance vessel structure, and experimental studies show that several factors could play a role, including shear stress and hormonal stimulation. To date, there has been no systematic review of the many published papers which have studied the structural effects of antihypertensive therapy, and it is not known which conditions are best able to normalize resistance vessel structure. We have therefore made a survey of the available literature. The survey shows that change in blood pressure in indeed a poor indicator of change in resistance vessel structure. However, it is a remarkably consistent finding that normalization of resistance vessel structure is obtained with therapeutic regimens which reduce blood pressure by vasodilation rather than by lowering cardiac output Thus, to the extent that normalization of resistance vessel structure is deemed a goal of antihypertensive treatment, the survey points towards the importance of considering not only the treatment effect on blood pressure, but also the haemodynamic effects within patients with essential hypertension.

We investigated the reliability of calculating the mean blood pressure (MBP) in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) from the systolic and diastolic blood pressures (SBP; DBP), using a form factor, calculated as: (MBP - DBP)/(SBP - DBP). The mean values of this form factor, as determined by blood pressure curve integration, were 0.459 and 0.450 in awake and anaesthetized SHR, respectively. There was no change in the form factor with pulse frequency. When direct femoral artery MBP measurements (x) were compared with MBP values (y) calculated from tail-cuff measurements of SBP and DBP using the form factor, the linear relationship between the two parameters was: y = 0.91x + 1.5 mmHg (r = 0.98). Actually, direct measurements confirmed that the tail artery MBP was 6-7% lower than the femoral artery MBP. In awake Wistar-Kyoto (WKY) rats, the form factor was 0.468. We therefore concluded that an approximate form factor value of 0.46 could be used in rats to estimate the MBP from known values of SBP and DBP. We further suggest that, because pulse pressure in any given rat remains relatively constant with time, SBP and DBP can be estimated in experiments by initially measuring the pulse pressure; thus, only the MBP need be recorded thereafter.

We have studied the effects of long-term treatment with different antihypertensive drugs on blood pressure and mesenteric resistance vessel structure of spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), both during treatment and after withdrawal of treatment. Young SHR were treated from 4 to 24 weeks with five different drugs: perindopril (1.5 mg/kg per day), captopril (60 mg/kg per day), hydralazine (25 mg/kg per day), isradipine (42 mg/kg per day) and metoprolol (130 mg/kg per day). At 24 weeks, 24-h mean blood pressures (MBP), measured invasively, were 121 mmHg (perindopril), 137 mmHg (captopril), 140 mmHg (hydralazine), 149 mmHg (isradipine) and 146 mmHg (metoprolol), compared to control values of 177 mmHg (SHR) and 132 mmHg (Wistar-Kyoto rats, WKY). Mesenteric resistance vessel structure, measured as media:lumen ratio (m:l), was also reduced to different extents: to WKY-level by perindopril (m:l = 4.4%), to midway between SHR- and WKY-levels by captopril, hydralazine and isradipine (m:l = 5.9%), and not at all by metoprolol (m:l = 6.8%). When treatment was discontinued, low MBP (ca 151 mmHg) persisted for 12 weeks in rats treated with the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (perindopril and captopril), but rose rapidly in rats which had received the other treatments. At 3-12 weeks after withdrawal of treatment vascular structure was closely correlated with the blood pressure expected from the SHR- and WKY-control values, as were the left ventricle: body weight ratios. The results suggest that the ability of a drug to control vascular structure during treatment is not in itself a predictor of a persistent effect on blood pressure after withdrawal of treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)