Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common hormonal disorder in reproductive-age women. In a study published in Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, women with PCOS were more likely to also have migraine, hypertension, tendinitis, osteoarthritis, and endometriosis. Affected women were also using medications more often and reported their own health to be poorer than women without PCOS.
Few studies have systematically assessed the overall comorbidity in women with PCOS, which should be of greater importance given the high costs of PCOS-related comorbidity. For example, PCOS-related type 2 diabetes alone has been estimated to carry an annual cost of $310 million in the UK and $1.77 billion in the USA. The syndrome often remains underdiagnosed despite being so common, and therefore is less represented in national databases, making it harder to assess comorbidities.
The present study included 246 women with PCOS symptoms or diagnoses and 1573 controls who were surveyed during their late reproductive years at age 46.
“PCOS is often labelled as a reproductive concern; however, in most cases this is well managed with fertility treatments. Our study underscores the need for health professionals to acknowledge the risk for several comorbidities and increased health burden related to this common syndrome,” said senior author professor Terhi T. Piltonen, MD, PhD, of the University of Oulu, in Finland. “Women should also be aware of this risk, and they should be supported by early diagnosis and treatment.”
The risk of intracranial aneurysm rupture was lower in people taking renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors for hypertension, according to the findings of a Chinese study published in Hypertension.
A database with more than 3000 people with these aneurysms in 2016–2021, rupture rates reached 23.4% in RAAS inhibitor users and 76.6% in non-users.
RAAS inhibitor use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of intracranial aneurysm rupture (odds ratio [OR] 0.490), and this applied to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (OR 0.559) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) alike (OR 0.414).
The RAAS inhibitors’ effect persisted across subgroups by age, sex, BMI, control of hypertension, monotherapy and combination therapy, and location and size of intracranial aneurysms.
The researchers pointed out the safety and affordability of RAAS inhibitors, and suggested that a randomised trial be conducted to confirm whether these medications protect against aneurysm rupture.
Hypertension is known to to increases the risk of intracranial aneurysm rupture, the cause of most subarachnoid haemorrhage strokes.
The authors note that there is evidence suggesting RAAS activation is involved in the pathogenesis of intracranial aneurysms.
“In hypertension, the RAAS has wide-ranging effects on blood pressure regulation through sodium retention, pressure natriuresis, salt sensitivity, vasoconstriction, endothelial dysfunction, and vascular injury. Given these facts, in addition to the directly increasing hemodynamic stresses, activation of the RAAS by systemic hypertension can cause vascular inflammation, injury, and remodeling and thereby contribute to the process of intracranial aneurysm rupture,” they explained.
How inhibiting RAAS would prevent aneurysm rupture was unclear, the authors noted, which could be investigated in a future study.
For this retrospective study, the authors reviewed the records of 3044 adults (mean age 61, 36.6% men) patients across 20 Chinese academic medical centres.
Patients were on blood pressure medications and had an intracranial aneurysm, and split between those whose aneurysms had ruptured (n = 1238) or had not ruptured (n = 1806) by the time of analysis. Aneurysms could be treated by clipping, coiling, and/or conservative treatment.
A secondary analysis matched 541 RAAS inhibitor users with an equal number of non-users, revealing that 17.7% of ruptured aneurysms would be prevented if all patients took RAAS inhibitors.
Besides RAAS inhibitor non-use, other independent predictors of rupture included female sex, passive smoking, uncontrolled or unmonitored hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, and aneurysmal location outside the internal carotid artery.
“Our study importantly extends previous studies of blood pressure control, treating hyperlipidemia and diabetes aggressively, and avoiding passive smoking as second [prevention] for these patients,” the authors wrote.
Limitations include possible confounding variables, as well as key clinical variables, such as blood pressure measurements and duration and dose of RAAS inhibitor therapy not being included in the database.
A study published in Frontiers in Neuroscience demonstrated that blood pressure and renal sympathetic nerve activity (RSNA) can be controlled by bioelectronic treatment. RSNA is often increased in hypertension and renal disease.
Using a custom-wired electrode, Professor Mario Romero-Ortega previously reported that deep peroneal nerve stimulation (DPNS) elicits an acute reduction in blood pressure. The current study, advances that work, focusing on his development of a small implantable wireless neural stimulation system and exploration of different stimulation parameters to achieve a maximum lowered response.
Prof Romero-Ortega integrated a nerve stimulation circuit less than a millimetre in size, with a novel nerve attachment microchannel electrode that can be implanted into small nerves, while enabling external power and DPNS modulation control.
Using this implantable device, his team demonstrated that systolic blood pressure can be lowered 10% in one hour and 16% two hours after nerve stimulation.
“Our results indicate that DPNS consistently induces an immediate and reproducible arterial depressor effect in response to electrical stimulation of the deep peroneal nerve,” reported Prof Romero-Ortega.
While pharmacological treatments are effective, blood pressure remains uncontrolled in 50–60% of resistant hypertensive subjects. Unfortunately, despite the use of multiple antihypertensive drugs in combination, blood pressure remains poorly controlled in 50–60% of the hypertensive population and approximately 12–18% of them develop resistant hypertension, defined as blood pressure greater than 140/90 mmHg despite the use of antihypertensive drugs.
“In this study, DPNS induced an initial increase in RSNA during the first 2–3 seconds, followed by a reduction in renal activity and mean arterial pressure, despite the increase in heart rate,” said Prof Romero-Ortega. “The observed activation of the RSNA during the DPNS was not expected since its activity is associated with hypertension.”
A new study published this month in the journal Hypertension has shown gut bacteria can reduce the effectiveness of certain antihypertensive drugs. The researchprovides the first clues into why some people not respond well to medication.
Among those with hypertension, an estimated 20% have resistant hypertension, where their blood pressure remains high despite aggressive treatment.
“The only thing doctors can really do in these patients is adding or switching medications and increasing the dose with the hope they can find something that works,” said Dr Tao Yang, an assistant professor at University of Toledo and the study’s first and lead author. “Until now, we haven’t had any clear indication what the mechanism is for resistant hypertension. Our research could provide a first step toward identifying new ways to effectively overcome treatment-resistant hypertension.”
Recent research has focused on the link between blood pressure and the gut microbiome. That work has helped to unravel potential causes of hypertension beyond diet and exercise. However, Dr Yang’s research is the first to examine the impact of gut bacteria on blood pressure medication itself.
In the study, UToledo scientists compared the effectiveness of the antihypertensive drug quinapril in rats with normal gut bacteria against those with gut microbiota depleted by high doses of antibiotics.
Researchers found a clear difference between the two, with animals that were given antibiotics first responding much better to quinapril.
Analysis of the gut bacteria composition in the animals identified the bacteria Coprococcus as the culprit. Laboratory experiments proved that Coprococcus comes, a dominant bacteria species in this genus, can break down quinapril and ramipril, resulting in the compromised blood pressure-lowering effects.
While the study was confined to animal models and lab experiments, researchers did find at least one intriguing case study that seems to support the notion that this could be applicable to humans.
That 2015 report, published in the International Journal of Cardiology, described a woman with a long history of treatment-resistant hypertension whose blood pressure was controlled without any antihypertensive medication for the two weeks she was taking antibiotics for a post-surgical infection. Her blood pressure was able to be controlled with only one medication for six months after stopping antibiotics, before again becoming treatment-resistant.
“This is just one report and more research is needed. However, this suggests that gut bacteria can play a very real and very important role in regulating the efficacy of blood pressure medication,” Dr Yang said.
The research group intends to further explore the interaction between additional blood pressure medications and other common types of gut bacteria.
Though long-term use of antibiotics isn’t a realistic strategy for addressing treatment-resistant hypertension, Dr Yang said it should be possible for someone to alter their microbiota through probiotics, prebiotics and changes in diet.
“The ultimate goal of my research is to identify ways we can specifically target the bacteria in an individual’s gut to improve drug efficacy,” he said. “This has the potential to benefit a lot of people.”
An American Heart Association scientific statement reviewing new evidence and guidance on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) of children and adolescents published in the journal Hypertension.
The statement provides simplified classifications for ABPM in children and adolescents. ABPM is designed to evaluate a person’s blood pressure during daily living activities, including times of physical activity, sleep and stress.
Key points of the statement:
The statement provides simplified classifications for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in children and adolescents. ABPM is designed to evaluate a person’s blood pressure during daily living activities, including times of physical activity, sleep and stress.
The new classifications come with guidance on when ABPM is appropriate and how to interpret monitoring results.
Children who have medical diagnoses, such as kidney disease, may have normal office blood pressure but significant abnormalities noted on ABPM. Without taking ABPM into account, this can lead to a more benign prognosis.
Elevated childhood blood pressure is linked to heart and kidney damage during youth and adulthood, as well as brain changes associated with worse cognitive function.
ABPM helps ease concern of spikes in blood pressure caused by measurement anxiety, known as white coat hypertension, and helps assess daily blood pressure patterns.
ABPM is used to confirm whether a child or adolescent with high blood pressure during a clinic measurement truly has hypertension.
“For patients with allergic disorders, routine evaluation of blood pressure and routine examination for coronary heart disease should be given by clinicians to ensure early treatments are given to those with hypertension or coronary heart disease,” said Yang Guo, PhD, the study’s lead author.
An association between allergic disorders and cardiovascular disease was detected in prior research, findings which remained controversial, Dr Guo explained. The present study sought to determine whether an increased cardiovascular risk exists in adults with allergic disorders.
The study used 2012 data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a cross-sectional survey of the US population. In the allergic group were adults with at least one allergic disorder, including asthma, respiratory allergy, digestive allergy, skin allergy and other allergy. The study included a total of 34 417 adults, over half of whom were women, average age 48.5 years. The allergic group included 10 045 adults. The researchers adjusted for age, sex, race, smoking, alcohol drinking and body mass index; they also examined subgroups stratified by demographic factors.
Having a history of allergic disorders was found to be associated with increased risk of developing hypertension and coronary heart disease. Further analysis showed that individuals with a history of allergic disorders between ages 18 and 57 had a higher risk of hypertension. An increased risk of coronary heart disease was seen in male Black/African American participants between ages 39-57. Asthma was the largest contributor of risk of hypertension and coronary heart disease.
Dr Guo said that to confirmed these findings, large cohort studies with long-term follow-up are required. Discovering the underlying mechanism could also help with management.
Among young and middle-aged adults with high blood pressure, a substantial rise in blood pressure upon standing may identify those with a higher risk of serious cardiovascular events, such as heart attack and stroke, according to new research published in the journal Hypertension.
“This finding may warrant starting blood-pressure-lowering treatment including medicines earlier in patients with exaggerated blood pressure response to standing,” said Professor Paolo Palatini, MD, lead author of the study.
Blood pressure usually falls slightly upon standing up. In this study, researchers assessed whether the opposite response – a significant rise in systolic blood pressure upon standing – is a risk factor for heart attack and other serious cardiovascular events.
Researchers recruited 1207 people aged 18-45 years old with untreated stage 1 hypertension, from the ongoing HARVEST study which started in 1990. Stage 1 hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure of 140–159 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP 90–100 mm Hg. None had taken blood pressure-lowering medication prior to the study, and all were initially classed as low risk for major cardiovascular events based on lifestyle and medical history.
The researchers took six blood pressure measurements in various physical positions, including when lying down and after standing up. The 120 participants with the highest rise (top 10%) in blood pressure upon standing averaged an 11.4mmHg increase; all increases in this group were greater than 6.5mmHg. Remaining participants averaged a 3.8mmHg fall in systolic blood pressure upon standing.
The researchers compared heart disease risk factors, laboratory measures and the occurrence of major cardiovascular events (heart attack, heart-related chest pain, stroke, aneurysm of the aortic artery, clogged peripheral arteries) and chronic kidney disease among participants in the two groups. In some analyses, the development of atrial fibrillation, an arrhythmia that is a major risk factor for stroke, was also noted. Results were adjusted for age, gender, parental history of heart disease, and several lifestyle factors and measurements taken during study enrolment.
During an average 17-year follow-up, there were 105 major cardiovascular events among the participants. The most common were heart attack, heart-related chest pain and stroke.
People in the top 10% for rise in blood pressure:
had nearly twice the risk for a major cardiovascular event compared to the others;
did not generally have a higher risk profile for cardiovascular events during their initial evaluation (outside of the exaggerated blood pressure response to standing);
were more likely to be smokers (32.1% vs 19.9% in the non-rising group), yet physical activity levels were comparable, and they were not more likely to be overweight or obese, and no more likely to have a family history of cardiovascular events;
had more favourable cholesterol levels (lower total cholesterol and higher high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol);
had lower systolic blood pressure when lying down than the other group (140.5 mm Hg vs. 146.0 mm Hg, respectively), yet blood pressure measures were higher when taken over 24 hours.
After adjusting for average blood pressure taken over 24 hours, an exaggerated blood pressure response to standing remained an independent predictor of adverse heart events or stroke.
“The results of the study confirmed our initial hypothesis – a pronounced increase in blood pressure from lying to standing could be prognostically important in young people with high blood pressure. We were rather surprised that even a relatively small increase in standing blood pressure (6-7 mm Hg) was predictive of major cardiac events in the long run,” said Prof Palatini.
In a subset who had stress hormones measured from 24-hour urine samples, the epinephrine/creatinine ratio was higher in the people with rising BP compared to non-risers (118.4 nmol/mol vs 77.0 nmol/mol, respectively).
“Epinephrine levels are an estimate of the global effect of stressful stimuli over the 24 hours. This suggests that those with the highest blood pressure when standing may have an increased sympathetic response to stressors,” said Prof Palatini. “Overall, this causes an increase in average blood pressure.”
“The findings suggest that blood pressure upon standing should be measured in order to tailor treatment for patients with high blood pressure, and potentially, a more aggressive approach to lifestyle changes and blood-pressure-lowering therapy may be considered for people with an elevated blood pressure response to standing,” he said.
Hundreds of pensioners queuing for their old age grants are being screened and tested for hypertension at paypoints in Mpumalanga. In this way, care is provided where and to whom it’s needed most.
In total, more than 4.2 million people in South Africa aged 60 and older currently receive the Older Persons Grant. For many of them, particularly in rural areas, grant collection days often involve standing in queues for hours.
In a pilot project in Bushbuckridge, Mpumalanga, the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) and SAMRC/WITS’s Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit. are using these queues as an opportunity to take screening for hypertension to some of the most vulnerable and often neglected people in the country.
The study is being conducted in collaboration with local communities, the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA), the South African Post Office (SAPO) in Ximhungwe and Boxer Superstores in Thulamahashe.
The project called “Know Your Numbers” was launched in April 2021 with 20 fieldworkers from local communities at six sites where hundreds of pensioners gather each month to collect their grants. The teams take people’s blood pressure using mobile Omron machines.
“Screening about 100 people per queue, we are picking up high blood pressure in about 60% of the participants. These people are all referred to their closest local clinic for further assessment, treatment and care as required. About 30% of the participants are male and about 70% female and that’s because there are sadly less men alive to collect social grants,” said Jane Simmonds, Know Your Numbers project manager at SAMRC/WITS’s Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit.
Silent killer Hypertension is known as the ‘silent killer’ because there are no exclusive symptoms that point directly to the disease. A 2021 study by the SAMRC found that the prevalence of hypertension rose between 1998 and 2016, from 27% to 45% in men and 31% to 48% in women. This has a significant impact on the health of older persons. “Older adults contribute critical support to local households, fostering orphans, enabling schooling and countering food insecurity. We can ill afford a rising toll of deaths from stroke and heart failure, or greater vulnerability to Covid-19,” said Steve Tollman, Unit Director.
“Many people don’t have money to travel to the doctor or clinic before they’re already very sick,” said Simmonds. Measuring blood pressure in people standing in the queue could help them manage and improve their health and save them the costs and time involved in visiting a clinic for a simple monthly health check.
“People will not go to town or clinics for treatment or vaccines if they have to choose between spending their R1800 grant on food or for transport,” said Simmonds, who lobbied for what became a successful project to offer the Covid vaccine directly to pensioners while they were queuing.
She explained how transport costs and problems accessing the Electronic Vaccination Data System (EVDS) had become barriers to vaccination for older people when the vaccine was first rolled out.
“When the Covid vaccines became available to people 60 and older in July last year, I thought that if we could meet people in queues for hypertension screening, then why not reach them for vaccines? I spent a lot of time talking to the Minister Of Health, Deputy-Director General or anyone that would listen to me about this concept. Eventually the Solidarity Fund came on board to fund vaccine outreach sites through the national health department. These sites have done over 500 000 vaccines since July 2021,” she said.
SASSA’s Dianne Dunkerley told GroundUp that SASSA had agreed to a pilot project with strict conditions to protect the security of beneficiaries and to avoid prolonging their already lengthy wait in line.
Dunkerley said the project is being welcomed by older people. “Older people who didn’t realise they had hypertension were identified, and could then go to local clinics for treatment and further monitoring,” she said.
“In cases where people did not want to make decisions immediately, they were sent home with information to discuss with family and friends which is great.”
Fieldworkers from the community speaking to pensioners about the health screening outside the SA Post Office where they collect their social grant.
Dunkerly said SASSA “would not be averse to expanding this project to other provinces” and discussions were underway.
“We really have started seeing the benefits and the reduction of costs, both of transport and of time, for older people. We think that because they’re old, they don’t have anything else to do. Well, many pensioners look after entire families and do all kinds of things. Where we can minimise the time they spend looking for services, it really is a good thing,” she said.
Professor Andre Kengne, Director of the Non-Communicable Diseases Research Unit at SAMRC, told GroundUp, “Early lessons from the ‘Know Your Number’ project are strongly suggesting that the reach of prevention and control services for common health conditions including chronic diseases such as hypertension, can be substantially improved by taking some of the essential services such as health screening and health promotion to the most vulnerable people in the community.”
He said older persons are the most affected by chronic non-communicable diseases and that improving the detection, linkage to care and control of those conditions through appropriate community-based approaches, significantly reduces the related harmful health effects.
The researchers hope that lessons from the ongoing and thorough pilot evaluation can be used to lobby the government to include screening and tests for diabetes, HIV, TB, cancers and other health issues which affect older persons.
More intensive hypertension treatment could help prevent or delay strokes in older adults, according to an analysis of results from randomised clinical trials published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.
The researchers initially screened 22 trials for inclusion. Nine trials involving 38 779 adults with an average age ranging from 66 to 84 years were included in the analysis, with follow-up times ranging from 2.0 to 5.8 years.
On average, the researchers found that it took 1.7 years to prevent 1 stroke for 200 older persons treated with more intensive hypertension treatment.
For older adults with baseline systolic blood pressures below 150 mmHg, the time to benefit from more intensive hypertension treatment was longer than 1.7 years; for older adults with baseline systolic blood pressure above 190 mmHg, the time to benefit was shorter than 1.7 years.
In their discussion, the researchers noted the risks of aggressive hypertension treatment, including hypotension, syncope and falls. However, they noted that emerging evidence shows that the increase in fall risk is transient.
“While the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend individual risk discussions about hypertension treatment for primary prevention in older adults, there is a critical gap in data about how long a patient needs to receive blood pressure treatment before they will benefit – or the blood pressure treatment’s time to benefit,” said lead author Vanessa S. Ho, MS, of California Northstate University College of Medicine. “A treatment’s time to benefit is an especially important consideration for patients with a limited life expectancy who may experience immediate burdens or harms from any additional medication.”
Long-term paracetamol use could increase the risk of heart disease and strokes in people with high blood pressure, according to a randomised clinical trial by the University of Edinburgh.
Researchers recommend that patients with a long term prescription, usually for chronic pain, should rather choose the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time.
The study, which appears in Circulation, is the first large randomised clinical trial to address the question of paracetamol’s effect on cardiovascular disease, and complements earlier work in observational studies.
Paracetamol was often suggested as a safer alternative to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which are known to increase blood pressure and risk of heart disease.
In the latest study, 110 patients with a history of high blood pressure were prescribed one gram of paracetamol four times a day – a routinely prescribed dose in patients with chronic pain – or a matched placebo for two weeks. All patients received both treatments, with the order randomised and blinded. The paracetamol group saw a significant increase in blood pressure, compared to the placebo group.
This rise was similar to that seen with NSAIDs, and could be expected to increase the risk of heart disease or stroke by around 20%. The findings should lead to a review of long-term paracetamol prescriptions to patients, said the researchers, especially to those with hypertension and an increased risk of heart disease or stroke.
Lead Investigator Dr. Iain MacIntyre said: “This is not about short-term use of paracetamol for headaches or fever, which is, of course, fine—but it does indicate a newly discovered risk for people who take it regularly over the longer term, usually for chronic pain.”
Principal Investigator Professor David Webb said: “We would recommend that clinicians start with a low dose of paracetamol, and increase the dose in stages, going no higher than needed to control pain. Given the substantial rises in blood pressure seen in some of our patients, there may be a benefit for clinicians to keep a closer eye on blood pressure in people with high blood pressure who newly start paracetamol for chronic pain.”
Professor Sir Nilesh Samani, Medical Director at the British Heart Foundation, who funded the study, said: “This research shows how quickly regular use of paracetamol can increase blood pressure in people with hypertension who are already at increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. It emphasises why doctors and patients should regularly review whether there is an ongoing need to take any medication, even something that may seem relatively harmless like paracetamol, and always weigh up the benefits and risks. However, if you take paracetamol occasionally to manage an isolated headache or very short bouts of pain, these research findings should not cause unnecessary concern.”
