Hypertension
-
Comparative Study
Monotherapy With Major Antihypertensive Drug Classes and Risk of Hospital Admissions for Mood Disorders.
Major depressive and bipolar disorders predispose to atherosclerosis, and there is accruing data from animal model, epidemiological, and genomic studies that commonly used antihypertensive drugs may have a role in the pathogenesis or course of mood disorders. In this study, we propose to determine whether antihypertensive drugs have an impact on mood disorders through the analysis of patients on monotherapy with different classes of antihypertensive drugs from a large hospital database of 525 046 patients with follow-up for 5 years. There were 144 066 eligible patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria: age 40 to 80 years old at time of antihypertensive prescription and medication exposure >90 days. ⋯ The median time to hospital admission with mood disorder was 847 days for the 299 admissions (641 685 person-years of follow-up). Patients on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers had the lowest risk for mood disorder admissions, and compared with this group, those on β-blockers (hazard ratio=2.11; [95% confidence interval, 1.12-3.98]; P=0.02) and calcium antagonists (2.28 [95% confidence interval, 1.13-4.58]; P=0.02) showed higher risk, whereas those on no antihypertensives (1.63 [95% confidence interval, 0.94-2.82]; P=0.08) and thiazide diuretics (1.56 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-3.73]; P=0.32) showed no significant difference. Overall, our exploratory findings suggest possible differential effects of antihypertensive medications on mood that merits further study: calcium antagonists and β-blockers may be associated with increased risk, whereas angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers may be associated with a decreased risk of mood disorders.
-
Autonomic dysreflexia (AD), which describes episodic hypertension, is highly prevalent in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). In non-SCI, primary hypertension depresses cardiac contractile reserve via β-adrenergic mechanisms. In this study, we investigated whether AD contributes to the impairment in cardiac contractile function that accompanies SCI. ⋯ In response to β-adrenergic stimulation, SCI plus repetitive induction of AD exhibited an attenuated increase in contractile indices (P<0.001), despite no differences in β-receptor expression within the left ventricle. Our clinical data confirm our experimental findings by demonstrating significant associations between the number of daily AD events and markers of systolic and diastolic function along with left ventricular mechanics. Here, we provide the first evidence from a translational perspective that AD exerts insidious effects on cardiac function in rodents and humans with SCI.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Orthostatic Hypotension in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) Blood Pressure Trial: Prevalence, Incidence, and Prognostic Significance.
Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is associated with hypertension and diabetes mellitus. However, in populations with both hypertension and diabetes mellitus, its prevalence, the effect of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure (BP) targets on incident OH, and its prognostic significance are unclear. In 4266 participants in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) BP trial, seated BP was measured 3×, followed by readings every minute for 3 minutes after standing. ⋯ Neither age nor systolic BP treatment target (intensive, <120 mm Hg versus standard, <140 mm Hg) was related to OH incidence. Over a median follow-up of 46.9 months, OH was associated with increased risk of total death (hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.36) and heart failure death/hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.85, 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.93), but not with the primary outcome or other prespecified outcomes. In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension, OH was common, not associated with intensive versus standard BP treatment goals, and predicted increased mortality and heart failure events.
-
Comparative Study
Invasively Measured Aortic Systolic Blood Pressure and Office Systolic Blood Pressure in Cardiovascular Risk Assessment: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Aortic systolic blood pressure (BP) represents the hemodynamic cardiac and cerebral burden more directly than office systolic BP. Whether invasively measured aortic systolic BP confers additional prognostic value beyond office BP remains debated. In this study, office systolic BP and invasively measured aortic systolic BP were recorded in 21 908 patients (mean age: 63 years; 58% men; 14% with diabetes mellitus) with stable angina pectoris undergoing elective coronary angiography during January 2001 to December 2012. ⋯ Both office and aortic systolic BP were associated with stroke in patients with diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio per 10 mm Hg, 1.18 [95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.30] and 1.14 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.24], respectively) and with myocardial infarction in patients without diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.12] and 1.05 [95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.10], respectively). In models including both BP measurements, aortic BP lost statistical significance and aortic BP did not confer improvement in either C-statistics or net reclassification analysis. In conclusion, invasively measured aortic systolic BP does not add prognostic information about cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality compared with office BP in patients with stable angina pectoris, either with or without diabetes mellitus.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Use and Major Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated With the Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitor Alogliptin.
Activation of the sympathetic nervous system when there is dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibition in the presence of high-dose angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition has led to concerns of potential increases in cardiovascular events when the 2 classes of drugs are coadministered. We evaluated cardiovascular outcomes from the EXAMINE (Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes With Alogliptin versus Standard of Care) trial according to ACE inhibitor use. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a recent acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned to receive the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor alogliptin or placebo added to existing antihyperglycemic and cardiovascular prophylactic therapies. ⋯ Composite rates for cardiovascular death and heart failure in patients on ACE inhibitor occurred in 6.8% of patients on alogliptin versus 7.2% on placebo (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.2; P=0.57). There were no differences for these end points nor for blood pressure or heart rate in patients on higher doses of ACE inhibitor. Cardiovascular outcomes were similar for alogliptin and placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary disease treated with ACE inhibitors.