Journal of hypertension
-
Journal of hypertension · Nov 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialOrlistat in hypertensive overweight/obese patients: results of a randomized clinical trial.
To assess the effect of orlistat plus diet compared with diet alone in promoting weight loss and blood pressure reduction in hypertensive, overweight/obese patients. ⋯ In both groups there was a reduction in weight, blood pressure and metabolic parameters. The orlistat group performed better in reducing weight, DBP, glucose and cholesterol. Results show that even a small reduction in weight helps to control blood pressure and glucose. The cost-benefit of the use of orlistat should be evaluated for hypertensive obese patients.
-
Journal of hypertension · Nov 2003
High rate of detection of primary aldosteronism, including surgically treatable forms, after 'non-selective' screening of hypertensive patients.
Wide testing of the aldosterone : renin ratio among hypertensive individuals has revealed primary aldosteronism to be common, with most patients normokalaemic. Some investigators, however, have reported aldosterone-producing adenoma to be rare among patients so detected. ⋯ When performed with careful regard to confounding factors, measurement of the aldosterone : renin ratio in all hypertensive individuals, followed by fludrocortisone suppression testing to confirm or exclude primary aldosteronism and adrenal venous sampling to determine the subtype, can result in the detection of significant numbers of patients with specifically treatable or potentially curable hypertension.
-
Journal of hypertension · Oct 2003
Multicenter StudyBlood pressure is insufficiently controlled in European patients with established coronary heart disease.
Elevated blood pressure is associated with an impaired prognosis in patients with established coronary heart disease. Adequate blood pressure control is therefore of utmost importance. We report on two successive European surveys that evaluated whether the goals given in recommendations on secondary prevention are achieved. ⋯ During 1995-2000 the prevalence of elevated blood pressure in patients with established coronary heart disease remained at an unacceptably high level. Throughout Europe, still about half of coronary patients require more intensive blood pressure management.
-
Journal of hypertension · Sep 2003
The influence of absolute cardiovascular risk, patient utilities, and costs on the decision to treat hypertension: a Markov decision analysis.
To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of blood pressure-lowering treatment over a lifetime. ⋯ Policy decisions about which patients to treat depend on whether a life-expectancy or cost-effectiveness perspective is taken. Treatment increases life expectancy in all strata of age, sex, and cardiovascular risk. However, younger individuals stand to gain proportionately more from blood pressure treatment than do the elderly. In terms of cost-effectiveness, patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease are a highly cost-effective group to treat. In patients at lower risk of cardiovascular disease, consideration should be given to issues of patient preference and cost.
-
Journal of hypertension · Aug 2003
Comparative StudyLeft ventricular hypertrophy in treated hypertensive patients with good blood pressure control outside the clinic, but poor clinic blood pressure control.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in treated patients with good blood pressure (BP) control during multiple home BP (HBP) measurements and during 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), but with unsatisfactory BP control in the clinic. These patients were compared with treated hypertensives whose BP was well controlled under the three circumstances. ⋯ In group I, 33 subjects out of the 72 (46%) with clinic BP > 140/90 mmHg had BP values controlled outside the clinic (23 according to HBP criteria and 22 according to ABP criteria). The prevalence of LVH (LV mass index > 134 g/m2 in men and > 110 g/m2 in women) was significantly higher in these patients (15.1 versus 2.8%, P < 0.01) than in group II (BP also controlled in the clinic), despite the fact that HBP and ABP were reduced to similar levels in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Our data provide evidence that treated hypertensive patients with good BP control at home or during ambulatory monitoring, but incomplete BP control in the clinic, have more pronounced cardiac alterations than patients with both clinic and out of the clinic BP control. This finding offers a new piece of information about the diagnostic value of BP measurement in the clinic to assess BP control during antihypertensive treatment.