BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clinical characteristics of resistant hypertensive patients in comparison to controlled patients have not been fully investigated in large cohorts. The aim of the study was to evaluate clinical differences, target organ damage and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in resistant hypertensive patients and patients controlled on three or less drugs. METHODS: In December 2010, from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry, we identified 14 461 patients fulfilling criteria of resistant hypertension and 13 436 hypertensive patients controlled on three or less drugs. Clinical characteristics were compared between these two groups. RESULTS: Compared to controlled patients, those having resistant hypertension were older, more obese and had longer hypertension duration. They also had more frequently diabetes, dyslipidemia, reduced renal function, microalbuminuria, left-ventricular hypertrophy and previous history of cardiovascular events. In multivariate analyses, hypertension duration, obesity, abdominal obesity, left-ventricular hypertrophy, reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate, and microalbuminuria were independently associated with resistant hypertension. Resistant hypertensive patients had higher ambulatory blood pressures, but differences between office and ambulatory blood pressure (white-coat effect) were also more pronounced in this group, revealing a proportion of 40% of patients with normal 24-h blood pressure. On the contrary, values of 24-h blood pressure above 130 and/or 80 mmHg (masked hypertension) were present in 31% of apparently controlled patients. CONCLUSION: Resistant hypertension is associated with obesity, longer hypertension duration and kidney and cardiac damage. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring reveals that white-coat hypertension is common among resistant hypertensive patients, as well as is masked hypertension among apparently controlled patients.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clinical characteristics of resistant hypertensivepatients in comparison to controlled patients have not been fully investigated in large cohorts. The aim of the study was to evaluate clinical differences, target organ damage and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in resistant hypertensivepatients and patients controlled on three or less drugs. METHODS: In December 2010, from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry, we identified 14 461 patients fulfilling criteria of resistant hypertension and 13 436 hypertensivepatients controlled on three or less drugs. Clinical characteristics were compared between these two groups. RESULTS: Compared to controlled patients, those having resistant hypertension were older, more obese and had longer hypertension duration. They also had more frequently diabetes, dyslipidemia, reduced renal function, microalbuminuria, left-ventricular hypertrophy and previous history of cardiovascular events. In multivariate analyses, hypertension duration, obesity, abdominal obesity, left-ventricular hypertrophy, reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate, and microalbuminuria were independently associated with resistant hypertension. Resistant hypertensivepatients had higher ambulatory blood pressures, but differences between office and ambulatory blood pressure (white-coat effect) were also more pronounced in this group, revealing a proportion of 40% of patients with normal 24-h blood pressure. On the contrary, values of 24-h blood pressure above 130 and/or 80 mmHg (masked hypertension) were present in 31% of apparently controlled patients. CONCLUSION: Resistant hypertension is associated with obesity, longer hypertension duration and kidney and cardiac damage. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring reveals that white-coat hypertension is common among resistant hypertensivepatients, as well as is masked hypertension among apparently controlled patients.
Authors: A de la Sierra; D A Calhoun; E Vinyoles; J R Banegas; J J de la Cruz; M Gorostidi; J Segura; L M Ruilope Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Robert M Carey; David A Calhoun; George L Bakris; Robert D Brook; Stacie L Daugherty; Cheryl R Dennison-Himmelfarb; Brent M Egan; John M Flack; Samuel S Gidding; Eric Judd; Daniel T Lackland; Cheryl L Laffer; Christopher Newton-Cheh; Steven M Smith; Sandra J Taler; Stephen C Textor; Tanya N Turan; William B White Journal: Hypertension Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Juan Carlos Yugar-Toledo; Heitor Moreno Júnior; Miguel Gus; Guido Bernardo Aranha Rosito; Luiz César Nazário Scala; Elizabeth Silaid Muxfeldt; Alexandre Alessi; Andrea Araújo Brandão; Osni Moreira Filho; Audes Diógenes de Magalhães Feitosa; Oswaldo Passarelli Júnior; Dilma do Socorro Moraes de Souza; Celso Amodeo; Weimar Kunz Sebba Barroso; Marco Antônio Mota Gomes; Annelise Machado Gomes de Paiva; Eduardo Costa Duarte Barbosa; Roberto Dischinger Miranda; José Fernando Vilela-Martin; Wilson Nadruz Júnior; Cibele Isaac Saad Rodrigues; Luciano Ferreira Drager; Luiz Aparecido Bortolotto; Fernanda Marciano Consolim-Colombo; Márcio Gonçalves de Sousa; Flávio Antonio de Oliveira Borelli; Sérgio Emanuel Kaiser; Gil Fernando Salles; Maria de Fátima de Azevedo; Lucélia Batista Neves Cunha Magalhães; Rui Manoel Dos Santos Póvoa; Marcus Vinícius Bolívar Malachias; Armando da Rocha Nogueira; Paulo César Brandão Veiga Jardim; Thiago de Souza Veiga Jardim Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: S-W Choi; M-K Kim; S W Han; S H Han; B K Lee; S U Lee; S-H Hur; S W Lim; K W Moon; S G Lee; S H Lee; S K Oh; J G Chea; S J Joo; M C Jo; K-S Hong; K-H Ryu Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 3.012