Search

Introduction: Hypertension is the main risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Notably, only about half of hypertensive patients manage to achieve the recommended blood pressure (BP) control. Main reasons for the persistence of uncontrolled BP during treatment are lack of compliance on the patients' side, and therapeutic inertia on physicians' side. Methods: During the global BP screening campaign "May Measure Month" (MMM) (May 1st to July 31st, 2022), a nationwide, cross-sectional, opportunistic study endorsed by the Italian Society of Hypertension was conducted on volunteer adults ≥ 18 years to raise awareness of the health issues surrounding high BP. A questionnaire on demographic/clinical features and questions on the use of fixed-dose single-pills for the treatment of hypertension was administered. BP was measured with standard procedures. Results: A total of 1612 participants (mean age 60.0±15.41 years; 44.7% women) were enrolled. Their mean BP was 128.5±18.1/77.1±10.4 mmHg. About half of participants were sedentary, or overweight/obese, or hypertensive. 55.5% individuals with complete BP assessment had uncontrolled hypertension. Most were not on a fixed-dose combination of antihypertensive drugs and did not regularly measure BP at home. Self-reported adherence to BP medications was similar between individuals with controlled and uncontrolled BP (95% vs 95.5%). Conclusions: This survey identified a remarkable degree of therapeutic inertia and poor patients' involvement in the therapeutic process and its monitoring in the examined population, underlining the importance of prevention campaigns to identify areas of unsatisfactory management of hypertension, to increase risk factors' awareness in the population with the final purpose of reducing cardiovascular risk.

Recent evidence suggests that an exaggerated blood pressure (BP) response to standing (ERTS) is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes, both in young and old individuals. In addition, ERTS has been shown to be an independent predictor of masked hypertension. In the vast majority of studies reporting on the prognostic value of orthostatic hypertension (OHT), the definition was based only on systolic office BP measurements. This consensus statement provides recommendations on the assessment and management of individuals with ERTS and/or OHT. ERTS is defined as an orthostatic increase in SBP at least 20 mmHg and OHT as an ERTS with standing SBP at least 140 mmHg. This statement recommends a standardized methodology to assess ERTS, by considering body and arm position, and the number and timing of BP measurements. ERTS/OHT should be confirmed in a second visit, to account for its limited reproducibility. The second assessment should evaluate BP changes from the supine to the standing posture. Ambulatory BP monitoring is recommended in most individuals with ERTS/OHT, especially if they have high-normal seated office BP. Implementation of lifestyle changes and close follow-up are recommended in individuals with ERTS/OHT and normotensive seated office BP. Whether antihypertensive treatment should be administered in the latter is unknown. Hypertensive patients with ERTS/OHT should be managed as any other hypertensive patient. Standardized standing BP measurement should be implemented in future epidemiological and interventional studies.

Objective:To develop scientific consensus recommendations for the optimal design and functions of different types of blood pressure (BP) measuring devices used in clinical practice for the detection, management, and long-term follow-up of hypertension.Methods:A scientific consensus meeting was performed by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and STRIDE BP (Science and Technology for Regional Innovation and Development in Europe) during the 2022 Scientific Meeting of the ESH in Athens, Greece. Manufacturers were also invited to provide their feedback on BP device design and development. Thirty-one international experts in clinical hypertension and BP monitoring contributed to the development of consensus recommendations on the optimal design of BP devices.Statement:International consensus was reached on the requirements for the design and features of five types of BP monitors, including office (or clinic) BP monitors, ambulatory BP monitors, home BP monitors, home BP telemonitors, and kiosk BP monitors for public spaces. For each device type "essential" requirements (must have), and "optional" ones (may have) are presented, as well as additional comments on the optimal device design and features.Conclusions:These consensus recommendations aim at providing manufacturers of BP devices with the requirements that are considered mandatory, or optional, by clinical experts involved in the detection and management of hypertension. They are also directed to administrative healthcare personnel involved in the provision and purchase of BP devices so that they can recommend the most appropriate ones.

Blood pressure is not a static parameter, but rather undergoes continuous fluctuations over time, as a result of the interaction between environmental and behavioural factors on one side and intrinsic cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms on the other side. Increased blood pressure variability (BPV) may indicate an impaired cardiovascular regulation and may represent a cardiovascular risk factor itself, having been associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, coronary artery disease, heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and dementia incidence. Nonetheless, BPV was considered only a research issue in previous hypertension management guidelines, because the available evidence on its clinical relevance presents several gaps and is based on heterogeneous studies with limited standardization of methods for BPV assessment.The aim of this position paper, with contributions from members of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and from a number of international experts, is to summarize the available evidence in the field of BPV assessment methodology and clinical applications and to provide practical indications on how to measure and interpret BPV in research and clinical settings based on currently available data. Pending issues and clinical and methodological recommendations supported by available evidence are also reported. The information provided by this paper should contribute to a better standardization of future studies on BPV, but should also provide clinicians with some indications on how BPV can be managed based on currently available data.

Background: Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension emergency (HE) and urgency (HU) may vary according to the physicians involved and the setting of the treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate differences in management of HE and HU according to the work setting of the physicians. Methods: The young investigators of the Italian Society of Hypertension developed a 23-item questionnaire spread by email invitation to the members of Italian Scientific societies involved in the field of emergency medicine and hypertension. Results: Six-hundred and sixty-five questionnaires were collected. No differences emerged for the correct definitions of HE and HU or for the investigation of possible drugs that may be responsible for an acute increase in BP. The techniques used to assess BP values (p < 0.004) and the sizes of cuffs available were different according to the setting. Cardiologists more frequently defined epistaxis (55.2% p = 0.012) and conjunctival hemorrhages (70.7%, p < 0.0001) as possible presentation of HE, and rarely considered dyspnea (67.2% p = 0.014) or chest pain (72.4%, p = 0.001). Intensive care (IC) unit doctors were more familiar with lung ultrasound (50% p = 0.004). With regard to therapy, cardiologists reported the lowest prescription of i.v. labetalol (39.6%, p = 0.003) and the highest of s.l. nifedipine (43.1% p < 0.001). After discharge, almost all categories of physicians required home BP assessment or referral to a general practitioner, whereas hypertensive center evaluation or ambulatory BP monitoring were less frequently suggested. Conclusion: Management and treatment of HE and HU may be different according to the doctor’s specialty. Educational initiatives should be done to standardize treatment protocols and to improve medical knowledge.

Blood pressure is not a static parameter, but rather undergoes continuous fluctuations over time, as a result of the interaction between environmental and behavioural factors on one side and intrinsic cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms on the other side. Increased blood pressure variability (BPV) may indicate an impaired cardiovascular regulation and may represent a cardiovascular risk factor itself, having been associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, coronary artery disease, heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and dementia incidence. Nonetheless, BPV was considered only a research issue in previous hypertension management guidelines, because the available evidence on its clinical relevance presents several gaps and is based on heterogeneous studies with limited standardization of methods for BPV assessment.The aim of this position paper, with contributions from members of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and from a number of international experts, is to summarize the available evidence in the field of BPV assessment methodology and clinical applications and to provide practical indications on how to measure and interpret BPV in research and clinical settings based on currently available data. Pending issues and clinical and methodological recommendations supported by available evidence are also reported. The information provided by this paper should contribute to a better standardization of future studies on BPV, but should also provide clinicians with some indications on how BPV can be managed based on currently available data. © 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.

Automated ‘oscillometric’ blood pressure (BP) measuring devices (BPMDs) were developed in the 1970s to replace manual auscultatory BP measurement by mercury sphygmomanometer. Automated BPMDs that have passed accuracy testing versus a reference auscultatory sphygmomanometer using a scientifically accepted validation protocol are recommended for clinical use globally. Currently, there are many thousands of unique automated BPMDs manufactured by hundreds of companies, with each device using proprietary algorithms to estimate BP and using a method of operation that is largely unchanged since inception. Validated automated BPMDs provide similar BP values to those recorded using manual auscultation albeit with potential sources of error mostly associated with using empirical algorithms to derive BP from waveform pulsations. Much of the work to derive contemporary BP thresholds and treatment targets used to manage cardiovascular disease risk was obtained using automated BPMDs. While there is room for future refinement to improve accuracy for better individual risk stratification, validated BPMDs remain the recommended standard for office and out-of-office BP measurement to be used in hypertension diagnosis and management worldwide. © 2022, The Author(s).

Total cell-associated HIV-1 DNA is a surrogate marker of the HIV-1 reservoir, however, certified systems for its quantification are not available. The Italian HIV DNA Network was launched to validate HIV-1 DNA quantification methods in use at University and Hospital labs. A quality control panel including HIV-1 DNA standards, reconstructed blood samples (RBSs) and DNA from different HIV-1 subtypes was blindly tested by 12 participating labs by quantitative real-time PCR (n = 6), droplet digital PCR (n = 3) or both (n = 3). The median 95% hit rate was 4.6 (3.7–5.5) copies per test and linearity in the tested range was excellent (R2 = 1.000 [1.000–1.000]). The median values obtained across labs were 3,370 (2,287–4,245), 445 (299–498), 59 (40–81) and 7 (6–11) HIV-1 DNA copies, for the 3,584, 448, 56 and 7-copy standards, respectively. With RBSs, measured values were within twofold with respect to the median in two thirds of cases. HIV-1 subtypes were missed (CRF01_AE by 3 labs) or underestimated by > 1 log (subtypes A, C, D, F by one lab; CRF01_AE by one lab; CRF02_AG by one lab). The overall performance was excellent with HIV-1 DNA standards, however detection of different HIV-1 subtypes must be improved.

Purpose: Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) might be considered a valid alternative to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for both the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Correct information on how to perform HBPM are crucial for its reliability. The aim of the present survey was to assess if hypertensive patients followed current recommendation on how to correctly perform HBPM measurements. Materials and methods: The survey included 30 different items on how to perform the HBPM. It was developed by the ‘Young Investigators’ group of the Italian Society of Arterial Hypertension (SIIA) and it was administered during the office visit between May 2019 and December 2021. Results: A total of 643 hypertensive patients participated in the study. Main results show that, despite the rate of informed patients was relatively high (71% of the whole population), unacceptable number of patients did not follow indications on how to perform a correct HBPM. Patients who were informed on how to measure home BP had a significantly higher rate of correct position during measurement (78 vs. 22%, p < 0.01), avoidance of talking and moving during measurement (68 vs. 32%, p < 0.0001), and correct number and time interval between two measurements (85 vs. 15%, p < 0.001). More accurate measurements of home BP were associated with less prevalence of carotid plaque. Conclusions: Correct performance for HBPM is low among patients treated in Italian hypertension centers. These findings shed light on the importance of correct HBPM measurements for the detection of accurate BP values for the proper management of hypertensive patients.

Hypertensive emergencies (HE) and urgencies (HU) are frequent causes of patients referral to Emergency Department (ED) and the approach may be different according to local clinical practice. Our aim was to explore awareness, management, treatment and counselling after discharge of HE and HU in Italy, by mean of an on-line survey. The young investigator research group of the Italian Society of Hypertension developed a 23-item questionnaire spread by e-mail invitation to the members of Italian Scientific societies in the field of Hypertension. 665 questionnaires were collected from EDs, Emergency and Urgency Medicine, Cardiology or Coronary Units, Internal Medicines, Intensive care, Stroke units. Symptoms considered suspicious of acute organ damage were: chest pain (89.0%), visual disturbances (89.8%), dyspnoea (82.7%), headache (82.1%), dizziness (52.0%), conjunctival haemorrhages (41.5%), tinnitus (38.2%) and epistaxis (34.4%). Exams more frequent prescribed were: electrocardiogram (97.2%), serum creatinine (91.4%), markers of cardiomyocyte necrosis (66.2%), echocardiography (65.1%). The use of intravenous or oral medications to treat HEs was 94.7% and 3.5%, while for HUs 24.4% and 70.8% respectively. Of note, a surprisingly high percentage of physicians (22 % overall, 24.5% in North Italy) used to prescribe sublingual nifedipine. After discharge, home blood pressure monitoring and general practitioner re-evaluation were more frequently suggested, while ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and hypertension specialist examination were less prescribed. The differences observed across the different macro-areas, regarded prescription of diagnostic test and drug administration. This survey depicts a complex situation of shades and lights in the real-life management of HE and HU in Italy.

Accurate measurement of blood pressure (BP) has a pivotal role in the management of patients with arterial hypertension. Recently, introduction of unattended office BP measurement has been proposed as a method allowing more accurate management of hypertensive patients and prediction of hypertension-mediated target organ damage (HMOD). This approach to BP measurement has been in particular proposed to avoid the white coat effect (WCE), which can be easily assessed once both attended and unattended BP measurements are obtained. In spite of its interest, the role of WCE in predicting HMOD remains largely unexplored. To fill this gap the Young Investigator Group of the Italian Hypertension Society (SIIA) conceived the study “Evaluation of unattended automated office, conventional office and ambulatory blood pressure measurements and their correlation with target organ damage in an outpatient population of hypertensives”. This is a no-profit multicenter observational study aiming to correlate attended and unattended BP measurements for quantification of WCE and to correlate WCE with markers of HMOD, such us left ventricular hypertrophy, left atrial dilatation, and peripheral atherosclerosis. The Ethical committee of the Federico II University hospital has approved the study.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate acquired drug resistance in Italy in the 2009–2018 period. Methods: We analysed 3094 patients from the Italian ARCA database who had failed antiretroviral treatment and who had received a genotypic test after 6 months of treatment. Drug resistance mutations were identified using International AIDS Society (IAS)-USA tables and the Stanford HIVdb algorithm. The global burden of acquired resistance was calculated among all subjects with antiretroviral failure. Time trends and correlates of resistance were analysed using standard statistical tests. Results: Patients of non-European origin and non-B subtypes increased significantly from 11.5% (103/896) to 19.2% (33/172) and from 13.1% (141/1079) to 23.8% (53/223), respectively, over time. Overall, 14.5% (448/3094), 12.1% (374/3094) and 37.8% (1169/3094) of patients failed first, second and later lines, respectively. According to both IAS and HIVdb, in the study period resistance to any class, nucleoside reverse inhibitor, non-nucleoside reverse inhibitor, and protease inhibitors (PIs) declined significantly. Integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) resistance declined significantly from 31% (36/116) to 20.8% (41/197) according to HIVdb but not to IAS. Divergent data were highlighted regarding the proportion of non-European patients carrying any, PI and INSTI resistance using IAS tables compared with the Stanford HIVdb algorithm, as the former failed to detect a decrease in resistance while the latter indicates a reduction of 1.6-, 5- and 1.8-fold resistance for such drug classes. In the multivariate analysis, the risk of resistance increased in patients with a larger number of treatment lines and higher viraemia and decreased in those starting therapy in the last biennium of the study. Discussion: A marked reduction in drug resistance was observed over 10 years, compatible with higher genetic barrier and potency of new antiretrovirals. Nonetheless, concerns remain for

Primary aldosteronism (PA) is the most common endocrine cause of resistant hypertension. Individuals with PA are at increased cardiovascular risk, and an appropriate management and treatment would ideally reduce such risk. Screening and diagnosis of PA requires a specific diagnostic test which is considered time- and cost-consuming and, as a result, is underperformed in clinical practice. An online survey reviewing available diagnostic procedures, laboratory testing, and clinical protocols for screening and confirmation of PA diagnosis was conducted among clinical lead of Reference and Excellence centers of the Italian Hypertension Society. A total of 102 questionnaires were sent and 62 centers participated in the survey. Assessment of the plasma renin (plasma renin activity/direct renin concentration) and plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) was available in all centers. Captopril challenge test (CCT) and saline infusion test (SIT) were available in 60% and 61% of the centers, respectively. Fludrocortisone suppression test was available in 32% of the units. Adrenal vein sampling was accessible in 32% of the centers. We found discrepancies in cutoff levels of aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) and PAC after SIT. Other discrepancies involved the duration of the wash-out period before ARR testing and dosage of captopril administered during CCT. In conclusion, although all centers are sufficiently equipped to perform PA screening, often patients should be referred to other centers to confirm the diagnosis of PA. A greater uniformity across centers to define precise cutoffs for screening and confirmatory testing for the diagnosis of PA would be of utility.

The Lancet Commission on Hypertension identified that a key action to address the worldwide burden of high blood pressure (BP) was to improve the quality of BP measurements by using BP devices that have been validated for accuracy. Currently, there are over 3000 commercially available BP devices, but many do not have published data on accuracy testing according to established scientific standards. This problem is enabled through weak or absent regulations that allow clearance of devices for commercial use without formal validation. In addition, new BP technologies have emerged (e.g. cuffless sensors) for which there is no scientific consensus regarding BP measurement accuracy standards. Altogether, these issues contribute to the widespread availability of clinic and home BP devices with limited or uncertain accuracy, leading to inappropriate hypertension diagnosis, management and drug treatment on a global scale. The most significant problems relating to the accuracy of BP devices can be resolved by the regulatory requirement for mandatory independent validation of BP devices according to the universally-accepted International Organisation for Standardization Standard. This is a primary recommendation for which there is an urgent international need. Other key recommendations are development of validation standards specifically for new BP technologies and online lists of accurate devices that are accessible to consumers and health professionals. Recommendations are aligned with WHO policies on medical devices and universal healthcare. Adherence to recommendations would increase the global availability of accurate BP devices and result in better diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, thus decreasing the worldwide burden from high BP.

The Lancet Commission on Hypertension identified that a key action to address the worldwide burden of high blood pressure (BP) was to improve the quality of BP measurements by using BP devices that have been validated for accuracy. Currently, there are over 3 000 commercially available BP devices, but many do not have published data on accuracy testing according to established scientific standards. This problem is enabled through weak or absent regulations that allow clearance of devices for commercial use without formal validation. In addition, new BP technologies have emerged (e.g. cuffless sensors) for which there is no scientific consensus regarding BP measurement accuracy standards. Altogether, these issues contribute to the widespread availability of clinic and home BP devices with limited or uncertain accuracy, leading to inappropriate hypertension diagnosis, management and drug treatment on a global scale. The most significant problems relating to the accuracy of BP devices can be resolved by the regulatory requirement for mandatory independent validation of BP devices according to the universally-accepted International Organization for Standardization Standard. This is a primary recommendation for which there is an urgent international need. Other key recommendations are development of validation standards specifically for new BP technologies and online lists of accurate devices that are accessible to consumers and health professionals. Recommendations are aligned with WHO policies on medical devices and universal healthcare. Adherence to recommendations would increase the global availability of accurate BP devices and result in better diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, thus decreasing the worldwide burden from high BP.