The standardized techniques of blood pressure measurement in the clinic are emphasized and the indications for ambulatory and/or home blood pressure monitoring are specified more broadly. The epidemiologic findings specific to Korean population related to blood pressure are reviewed. Cardiovascular risk of hypertensive patients are stratified based upon the data of a Korean population cohort study.

Smartphone technology has spread rapidly around the globe. According to a report released by the Korea Information Society Development Institute, about 95% of Koreans aged more than 30 years old owned smartphones. Recently, blood pressure (BP) measurement using a photoplethysmography-based smartphone algorithm paired with the smartwatch is continuously evolving. In this document, the Korean Society of Hypertension intends to remark the current results of smartphone / smartwatch-based BP measurement and recommend optimal BP measurement methods using a smartphone device. We aim to increase the likelihood of success in implementing these new technologies into improved hypertension awareness, diagnosis, and control.

Objective: Although statins are widely prescribed lipid-lowering drugs, there are concerns about the safety of their use in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), since statins increase the expression of ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2). This study aimed to disclose the association between statins and 60-day COVID-19 mortality. Approach and Results: All patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled in this study from January 19 to April 16, 2020, in Korea. We evaluated the association between the use of statins and COVID-19–related mortality in the overall and the nested 1:2 propensity score–matched study. Furthermore, a comparison of the hazard ratio for death was performed between COVID-19 patients and a retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized with pneumonia between January and June 2019 in Korea. The median age of the 10 448 COVID-19 patients was 45 years. Statins were prescribed in 533 (5.1%) patients. After adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities, Cox regression showed a significant decrease in hazard ratio associated with the use of statins (hazard ratio, 0.637 [95% CI, 0.425–0.953]; P =0.0283). Moreover, on comparing the hazard ratio between COVID-19 patients and the retrospective cohort of hospitalized pneumonia patients, the use of statins showed similar benefits. Conclusions: The use of statins correlates significantly with lower mortality in patients with COVID-19, consistent with the findings in patients with pneumonia. Graphic A graphic abstract is available for this article.

The presence of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) at the right ventricular insertion point (RVIP) on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is generally believed to be nonspecific, but the clinical implication of this unique LGE pattern in patients with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NICM) has not been elucidated. We investigated the prognostic significance of RVIP-LGE in NICM patients. A total of 360 consecutive NICM patients referred for CMR (102 with no LGE, 50 with RVIP-LGE, 121 with left ventricular [LV]-LGE, and 87 with both an LV and RVIP-LGE) were studied. The primary endpoint was a composite of the all-cause death, hospitalization due to worsening of heart failure, and major arrhythmic events. During a mean follow-up of 45.2 ± 36.5 months, 149 (41.4%) patients (22 [21.6%] no LGE vs. 16 [32.0%] RVIP-LGE vs. 62 [51.2%] LV-LGE vs. 49 [56.3%] both LV and RVIP-LGE, P < 0.0001) reached the primary endpoint. A Kaplan Meier curve demonstrated that RVIP-LGE patients had an intermediate trend of an event free survival rate for the composite endpoint (log-rank P < 0.0001). In a multivariable Cox regression model, LV-LGE (P = 0.008) and both LV and RVIP-LGE (P = 0.003) were significantly associated with a worse outcome, whereas RVIP-LGE was not (P = 0.101). In addition, RVIP-LGE patients (n = 32) had a more favorable outcome compared to LV-LGE patients (n = 32) even after matching the extent of the LGE (median 3.4% [interquartile range, 3.1–3.8], 8 [25.0%] RVIP-LGE vs. 20 [62.5%] LV-LGE, P = 0.002). LGE confined to the RVIP among NICM patients did not significantly increase the risk of adverse cardiac events, and also showed a better outcome than the same extent of LGE located in the LV. Identification of this unique LGE distribution may help refine the current risk stratification.

We sought to assess the association between common antihypertensive drugs and the risk of incident cancer in treated hypertensive patients. Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, the risk of cancer incidence was analyzed in patients with hypertension who were initially free of cancer and used the following antihypertensive drug classes: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs); angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs); beta blockers (BBs); calcium channel blockers (CCBs); and diuretics. During a median follow-up of 8.6 years, there were 4513 (6.4%) overall cancer incidences from an initial 70,549 individuals taking antihypertensive drugs. ARB use was associated with a decreased risk for overall cancer in a crude model (hazard ratio (HR): 0.744, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.696–0.794) and a fully adjusted model (HR: 0.833, 95% CI: 0.775–0.896) compared with individuals not taking ARBs. Other antihypertensive drugs, including ACEIs, CCBs, BBs, and diuretics, did not show significant associations with incident cancer overall. The long-term use of ARBs was significantly associated with a reduced risk of incident cancer over time. The users of common antihypertensive medications were not associated with an increased risk of cancer overall compared to users of other classes of antihypertensive drugs. ARB use was independently associated with a decreased risk of cancer overall compared to other antihypertensive drugs.

Treatment strategies are provided in accordance with the level of global cardiovascular risk, from lifestyle modification in the lower risk group to more comprehensive treatment in the higher risk group. Considering the common trend of combination drug regimen, the choice of the first drug is suggested more liberally according to the physician’s discretion.