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

Cardiac innervation by the parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) modulates the heart rate (HR) (chronotropic activity) and the contraction of the cardiac muscle (inotropic activity). The peripheral vasculature is controlled only by the SNS, which is responsible for peripheral vascular resistance. This also mediates the baroreceptor reflex (BR), which in turn mediates blood pressure (BP). Hypertension (HTN) and the autonomic nervous system (ANS) are closely related, such that derangements can lead to vasomotor impairments and several comorbidities, including obesity, hypertension, resistant hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. Autonomic dysfunction is also associated with functional and structural changes in target organs (heart, brain, kidneys, and blood vessels), increasing cardiovascular risk. Heart rate variability (HRV) is a method of assessing cardiac autonomic modulation. This tool has been used for clinical evaluation and to address the effect of therapeutic interventions. The present review aims (a) to approach the heart rate (HR) as a CV risk factor in hypertensive patients; (b) to analyze the heart rate variability (HRV) as a “tool” to estimate the individual risk stratum for Pre-HTN (P-HTN), Controlled-HTN (C-HTN), Resistant and Refractory HTN (R-HTN and Rf-HTN, respectively), and hypertensive patients with chronic renal disease (HTN+CKD).

Resistant hypertensive (RHTN) patients have endothelial dysfunction and aldosterone excess, which contribute to the development of resistance to antihypertensive treatment and cardiovascular complications. Biophysical forces within the arterial wall provide functional regulation of arterial stiffness. Carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) and flow-mediated brachial artery dilation (FMD) can be used to evaluate vascular stiffness and endothelial function. Although both techniques have been used in several studies in hypertensive patients, it is unknown whether endothelial dysfunction is also associated with vascular stiffness in RHTN patients. Methods. One hundred and ninety-three consecutive subjects were divided in three groups: 44 RHTN, 35 well-controlled hypertensive patients (HTN) and 25 normal healthy volunteers (NT). FMD was measured by high-resolution ultrasound and PWV was calculated from measurements of the pulse transit time and the distance traveled by the pulse between carotid and femoral arteries. Results. No significant differences were observed in respect to body mass index, age or other biochemical variables among the three groups. FMD (NO-dependent) values were statistically different when comparing RHTN and well controlled HTN patients (respectively, 8.3 ± 4.7% and 10.1 ± 5.9%) and 12.3 ± 6.3% in normal subjects (p < 0.05). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant difference in BP-adjusted PWV between RHTN and HTN (13.9 ± 1.0 and 11.5 ± 1.1 m/s, respectively; p < 0.05). FMD (NO-dependent) and PWV-adjusted values were strongly correlated in well-controlled HTN and NT subjects (r = − 0.74 and − 0.83, respectively). Although statistically significant, this correlation was lower in RHTN patients (r = − 0.43). Conclusion. We found a close relationship among high BP levels, endothelial dysfunction and vascular rigidity in hypertensive patients, demonstrated by a significantly higher increase in carotid–femoral PWV and a decrease in brachial artery FMD in RHTN when compared with well-controlled hypertensive patients. Although this study was not designed to test the prognostic, the vascular damage differences observed between patients with controlled vs uncontrolled hypertension suggest that the latter group may have a worse cardiovascular prognosis, requiring prospective assessment tests.

Background: Thinking about greater adherence to dietary planning, it is extremely important to be aware of all nutritional strategies and dietary prescriptions available in the literature, and of which of them is the most efficient for the management of T2DM. Methods: A search was carried out in 2023 for randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and guidelines in the following databases: Pubmed, Scielo, Web of Science, CrossRef and Google Scholar. In total, 202 articles were collected and analyzed. The period of publications was 1983–2023. Results: There is still no consensus on what the best nutritional strategy or ideal dietary prescription is, and individuality is necessary. In any case, these references suggest that Mediterranean Diet may of greater interest for the management of T2DM, with the following recommended dietary prescription: 40–50% carbohydrates; 15–25% proteins; 25–35% fats (<7% saturated, 10% polyunsaturated, and 10% monounsaturated); at least 14 g of fiber for every 1000 kcal consumed; and <2300 mg sodium. Conclusions: Individuality is the gold standard for dietary prescriptions, however, the Mediterranean diet with low levels of carbohydrates and fats seems to be the most promising strategy for the management of T2DM.

Hypertension, diabetes and obesity are not isolated findings, but a series of interacting interactive physiologic derangements. Taking into account genetic background and lifestyle behavior, AI (autonomic imbalance) could be a common root for RHTN (resistant hypertension) or RHTN plus type 2 diabetes (T2D) comorbidity development. Moreover, circadian disruption can lead to metabolic and vasomotor impairments such as obesity, insulin resistance and resistant hypertension. In order to better understand the triggered emergence of obesity and T2D comorbidity in resistant hypertension, we investigated the pattern of autonomic activity in the circadian rhythm in RHTN with and without type 2 diabetes (T2D), and its relationship with serum adiponectin concentration.

Resistant hypertension (RHTN) includes both patients whose blood pressure (BP) is uncontrolled on three or more medications (uncontrolled RHTN (UCRH)) and patients whose BP is controlled with use of four or more drugs (controlled RHTN (CRH)). It is unknown whether endothelial function and nocturnal drop demonstrate a similar pattern in patients with CRH and UCRH. We examined circadian BP patterns and vascular function in these patients. In all, 40 CRH and 26 UCRH patients, and 25 normotensives underwent biochemical testing, ambulatory BP monitoring, determination of brachial artery responses to endothelial-dependent (flow-mediated; dilation (FMD)) and independent (nitroglycerin mediated) stimuli. The nighttime drop in systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) was less pronounced in UCRH than in CRH (SBP, 1.9±1.6 versus 4.9±1.7%; DBP, 7.5±1.8 versus 10.9±1.8%, UCRH and CRH, respectively; P<0.05). FMD was greater in control group compared with RHTN patients. Patients with UCRH had significantly impaired FMD compared with CRH (5.9±2.3% versus 7.1±5.1%; P<0.0001). Therefore, UCRH patients have less nocturnal dipping and a more impaired endothelial response compared with CRH patients. These findings suggest that important differences among patients with RHTN may allow identify subgroups with increased cardiovascular risk.