Sumário 1. Definição, Epidemiologia e Prevenção Primária 528 1.1 Definição de Hipertensão Arterial 528 […] Diretrizes Brasileiras de Hipertensão Arterial – 2020 Sumário 1. Definição, Epidemiologia e Prevenção Primária 528 1.1 Definição de Hipertensão Arterial 528 […] Diretrizes Brasileiras de Hipertensão Arterial – 2020

The prognostic importance of the nocturnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) fall, adjusted for average 24-hour SBP levels, is unclear. The Ambulatory Blood Pressure Collaboration in Patients With Hypertension (ABC-H) examined this issue in a meta-analysis of 17 312 hypertensives from 3 continents. Risks were computed for the systolic night-to-day ratio and for different dipping patterns (extreme, reduced, and reverse dippers) relative to normal dippers. ABC-H investigators provided multivariate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), with and without adjustment for 24-hour SBP, for total cardiovascular events (CVEs), coronary events, strokes, cardiovascular mortality, and total mortality. Average 24-hour SBP varied from 131 to 140 mm Hg and systolic night-to-day ratio from 0.88 to 0.93. There were 1769 total CVEs, 916 coronary events, 698 strokes, 450 cardiovascular deaths, and 903 total deaths. After adjustment for 24-hour SBP, the systolic night-to-day ratio predicted all outcomes: from a 1-SD increase, summary HRs were 1.12 to 1.23. Reverse dipping also predicted all end points: HRs were 1.57 to 1.89. Reduced dippers, relative to normal dippers, had a significant 27% higher risk for total CVEs. Risks for extreme dippers were significantly influenced by antihypertensive treatment ( P <0.001): untreated patients had increased risk of total CVEs (HR, 1.92), whereas treated patients had borderline lower risk (HR, 0.72) than normal dippers. For CVEs, heterogeneity was low for systolic night-to-day ratio and reverse/reduced dipping and moderate for extreme dippers. Quality of included studies was moderate to high, and publication bias was undetectable. In conclusion, in this largest meta-analysis of hypertensive patients, the nocturnal BP fall provided substantial prognostic information, independent of 24-hour SBP levels.

Resistant hypertension (RH), defined as the failure to control office blood pressure (BP) despite optimal treatment with at least 3 antihypertensive drugs in full dosages, always including a diuretic, is a common, but generally understudied, clinical condition.¹ Its prevalence ranges from 10% to almost 30% of general hypertensive patients in different series.¹ In our general outpatient clinic,² the prevalence of RH was 17%, and in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT),³ 27% of uncontrolled hypertensive patients were using 3 or more drugs, with an estimated prevalence of RH of at least 15%. Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) has become increasingly important in the management of hypertensive patients,⁴ and one of its established indications is RH,^1,4,5 mainly because of the possibility that an exaggerated white-coat effect underlies the failure to control office BP levels, so-called white-coat RH.^6,7

Long-term visit-to-visit glycemic variability is an additional measure of glycemic control. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of several measures of glycemic variability for the occurrence of micro- and macrovascular complications, and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. 654 individuals were followed-up over a median of 9.3 years. Glycemic variability (SDs and coefficients of variation of HbA1c and fasting glycaemia) was measured during the first 12- and 24-months. Multivariate Cox analysis, adjusted for risk factors and mean HbA1c and fasting glycaemia levels, examined the associations between glycemic variability and the occurrence of microvascular (retinopathy, microalbuminuria, renal function deterioration, peripheral neuropathy) and macrovascular complications [total cardiovascular events (CVE), major adverse CVEs (MACE) and cardiovascular mortality], and of all-cause mortality. During follow-up, 128 patients had a CVE (96 MACE), and 158 patients died (67 from cardiovascular diseases); 152 newly-developed or worsened diabetic retinopathy, 183 achieved the renal composite outcome (89 newly developed microalbuminuria and 91 deteriorated renal function), and 96 newly-developed or worsened peripheral neuropathy. Glycemic variability, particularly the 24-month parameters either estimated by HbA1c or by fasting glycemia, predicted all endpoints, except for retinopathy and peripheral neuropathy development/progression, and was a better predictor than mean HbA1c. Glycemic variability predicted retinopathy development/progression in patients with good glycemic control (HbA1c ≤ 7.5%, 58 mmol/mol) and predicted new-incident peripheral neuropathy. Long-term visit-to-visit glycemic variability is an additional and frequently a better glycemic parameter than mean HbA1c levels for assessing the risk of future development of micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes.

The effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on blood pressures (BPs) in patients with resistant hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea is not established. We aimed to evaluate it in a randomized controlled clinical trial, with blinded assessment of outcomes. Four hundred thirty-four resistant hypertensive patients were screened and 117 patients with moderate/severe obstructive sleep apnea, defined by an apnea–hypopnea index ≥15 per hour, were randomized to 6-month CPAP treatment (57 patients) or no therapy (60 patients), while maintaining antihypertensive treatment. Clinic and 24-hour ambulatory BPs were obtained before and after 6-month treatment. Primary outcomes were changes in clinic and ambulatory BPs and in nocturnal BP fall patterns. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol (limited to those with uncontrolled ambulatory BPs) analyses were performed. Patients had mean (SD) 24-hour BP of 129(16)/75(12) mm Hg, and 59% had uncontrolled ambulatory BPs. Mean apnea–hypopnea index was 41 per hour and 58.5% had severe obstructive sleep apnea. On intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in any BP change, neither in nocturnal BP fall, between CPAP and control groups. The best effect of CPAP was on night-time systolic blood pressure in per-protocol analysis, with greater reduction of 4.7 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, −11.3 to +3.1 mm Hg; P =0.24) and an increase in nocturnal BP fall of 2.2% (95% confidence interval, −1.6% to +5.8%; P =0.25), in comparison with control group. In conclusion, CPAP treatment had no significant effect on clinic and ambulatory BPs in patients with resistant hypertension and moderate/severe obstructive sleep apnea, although a beneficial effect on night-time systolic blood pressure and on nocturnal BP fall might exist in patients with uncontrolled ambulatory BP levels.