Resistant hypertension (RH) is defined as above-goal elevated blood pressure (BP) in a patient despite the concurrent use of 3 antihypertensive drug classes, commonly including a long-acting calcium ...channel blocker, a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker), and a diuretic. The antihypertensive drugs should be administered at maximum or maximally tolerated daily doses. RH also includes patients whose BP achieves target values on ≥4 antihypertensive medications. The diagnosis of RH requires assurance of antihypertensive medication adherence and exclusion of the “white-coat effect” (office BP above goal but out-of-office BP at or below target). The importance of RH is underscored by the associated risk of adverse outcomes compared with non-RH. This article is an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on the detection, evaluation, and management of RH. Once antihypertensive medication adherence is confirmed and out-of-office BP recordings exclude a white-coat effect, evaluation includes identification of contributing lifestyle issues, detection of drugs interfering with antihypertensive medication effectiveness, screening for secondary hypertension, and assessment of target organ damage. Management of RH includes maximization of lifestyle interventions, use of long-acting thiazide-like diuretics (chlorthalidone or indapamide), addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (spironolactone or eplerenone), and, if BP remains elevated, stepwise addition of antihypertensive drugs with complementary mechanisms of action to lower BP. If BP remains uncontrolled, referral to a hypertension specialist is advised.
Intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) is one of the most frequent causes of stroke worldwide and confers one of the greatest risks of recurrent stroke compared with other causes of stroke. ...Asymptomatic ICAS is increasingly recognised as a risk factor for silent brain infarctions and dementia, magnifying the global burden of ICAS. Although ICAS is a lumen-based diagnosis, newer diagnostic imaging techniques, such as high-resolution MRI, might help to identify high-risk population subgroups to test interventions that might reduce the risk of stroke recurrence. Secondary stroke prevention in patients with ICAS currently consists of intensive management of modifiable risk factors and dual antiplatelet therapy, which is subsequently reduced to aspirin alone. Despite these therapies, the risk of recurrent stroke in patients presenting with stroke related to 70–99% ICAS exceeds 20% at 1 year; as such, better therapies are urgently needed. The optimal duration and combination of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with ICAS is uncertain and is being investigated in addition to low-dose anticoagulation and aspirin. Other ongoing or planned studies will provide high-quality observational data on the role of transluminal angioplasty and stenting, submaximal balloon angioplasty alone, direct or indirect arterial bypass, and ischaemic conditioning for prevention of stroke in patients with ICAS.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Summary Background Early results of the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent stroke in Intracranial Stenosis trial showed that, by 30 days, 33 (14·7%) of 224 patients ...in the stenting group and 13 (5·8%) of 227 patients in the medical group had died or had a stroke (percentages are product limit estimates), but provided insufficient data to establish whether stenting offered any longer-term benefit. Here we report the long-term outcome of patients in this trial. Methods We randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by centre with randomly permuted block sizes) 451 patients with recent transient ischaemic attack or stroke related to 70–99% stenosis of a major intracranial artery to aggressive medical management (antiplatelet therapy, intensive management of vascular risk factors, and a lifestyle-modification programme) or aggressive medical management plus stenting with the Wingspan stent. The primary endpoint was any of the following: stroke or death within 30 days after enrolment, ischaemic stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days of enrolment, or stroke or death within 30 days after a revascularisation procedure of the qualifying lesion during follow-up. Primary endpoint analysis of between-group differences with log-rank test was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT 00576693. Findings During a median follow-up of 32·4 months, 34 (15%) of 227 patients in the medical group and 52 (23%) of 224 patients in the stenting group had a primary endpoint event. The cumulative probability of the primary endpoints was smaller in the medical group versus the percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) group (p=0·0252). Beyond 30 days, 21 (10%) of 210 patients in the medical group and 19 (10%) of 191 patients in the stenting group had a primary endpoint. The absolute differences in the primary endpoint rates between the two groups were 7·1% at year 1 (95% CI 0·2 to 13·8%; p=0·0428), 6·5% at year 2 (–0·5 to 13·5%; p=0·07) and 9·0% at year 3 (1·5 to 16·5%; p=0·0193). The occurrence of the following adverse events was higher in the PTAS group than in the medical group: any stroke (59 26% of 224 patients vs 42 19% of 227 patients; p=0·0468) and major haemorrhage (29 13%of 224 patients vs 10 4% of 227 patients; p=0·0009). Interpretation The early benefit of aggressive medical management over stenting with the Wingspan stent for high-risk patients with intracranial stenosis persists over extended follow-up. Our findings lend support to the use of aggressive medical management rather than PTAS with the Wingspan system in high-risk patients with atherosclerotic intracranial arterial stenosis. Funding National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and others.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Reducing the high risk of recurrent stroke in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (sICAS) has proven to be challenging, but aggressive medical management, with intensive ...risk factor control and antithrombotic therapy, has been shown to be beneficial. High-intensity statins are recommended for patients with atherosclerotic stroke, including sICAS. Ezetimibe and PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitors are beneficial for those who fail to reach low-density lipoprotein targets or those with statin intolerance. The treatment target for sICAS is low-density lipoprotein <70 mg/dL. In neurologically stable patients, blood pressure should be treated to goal <140/90 mm Hg with the use of thiazide diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, or angiotensin II receptor blockers preferentially. For those with diabetes, treat to goal hemoglobin A1C ≤7% for most patients through combination of diet, insulin, and hypoglycemic drugs. Some degree of physical activity (eg, walking, stationary biking with arms or legs, etc) should be encouraged in all patients with sICAS who are not severely disabled. A minimum of 10 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity 4 times a week is recommended for patients who are capable of exercise. For all patients with severe sICAS (70%-99% stenosis), dual antiplatelet therapy for up to 90 days followed by single antiplatelet agent is recommended.
The CASSISS trial (China Angioplasty & Stenting for Symptomatic Intracranial Severe Stenosis), recently published in
, is the most recent of several randomized controlled trials that have failed to ...show a benefit of percutaneous angioplasty and stenting over medical therapy for the prevention of stroke due to intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis. Current practice guidelines recommended that percutaneous angioplasty and stenting should not be performed routinely as a treatment for stroke prevention in patients with intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis. The CASSISS trial reinforces those recommendations and will not change practice, but it may provide some important lessons for future trial design.
Objective:
Stroke risk due to intracranial atherosclerosis increases with degree of arterial stenosis. We evaluated the previously unexplored role of collaterals in modifying stroke risk in ...intracranial atherosclerosis and impact on subsequent stroke characteristics.
Methods:
Collateral flow was graded in blind fashion on 287 of 569 baseline angiograms (stenoses of 50–99% and adequate collateral views) in the Warfarin–Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial. Statistical models predicted stroke in the symptomatic arterial territory based on collateral flow grade, percentage of stenosis, and previously demonstrated independent covariates.
Results:
Across all stenoses, extent of collaterals was a predictor for subsequent stroke in the symptomatic arterial territory (hazard ratio HR none vs good, 1.14; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.39–3.30; poor vs good, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.46–13.07; p < 0.0001). For 70 to 99% stenoses, more extensive collaterals diminished risk of subsequent territorial stroke (HR none vs good, 4.60; 95% CI, 1.03–20.56; poor vs good, 5.90; 95% CI, 1.25–27.81; p = 0.0427). At milder degrees of stenoses (50–69%), presence of collaterals was associated with greater likelihood of subsequent stroke (HR none vs good, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04–0.82; poor vs good, 1.78; 95% CI, 0.37–8.57; p < 0.0001). In multivariate analyses, extent of collaterals was an independent predictor for subsequent stroke in the symptomatic arterial territory (HR none vs good, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.52–5.11; poor vs good, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.55–14.7; p = 0.0019).
Interpretation:
Collateral circulation is a potent determinant of stroke risk in intracranial atherosclerosis, demonstrating a protective role with severe stenoses and identifying more unstable milder stenoses. ANN NEUROL 2010;
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
