Key result
Supplementary text provides references for treatment-resistant hypertension management without presenting primary clinical data.
Why the study?
Treatment-resistant hypertension affects 5 to 30% of hypertensive patients and carries high cardiovascular risk, while its underlying pathophysiology remains unclear.
This review outlines the factors contributing to apparent treatment resistance in hypertension and discusses current and future management strategies, including device therapies and novel agents.
Supports aggressive TRH management to reduce CVD events; confirms elevated risk in randomized cohorts.
Hypertension affects >1 billion individuals worldwide. Despite the availability of effective antihypertensive therapy, the prevalence of treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH), defined as uncontrolled hypertension despite the use of ≥3 antihypertensive agents at optimum doses, is reported to be 5 to 30% of the hypertensive population. Uncontrolled hypertension contributes to an elevated risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and kidney failure. TRH is associated with a 50% higher risk of cardiovascular disease than controlled hypertension. Several factors contribute to apparent treatment resistance, including poor medication adherence, physician inertia, inadequate doses or inappropriate combinations of antihypertensive drugs, excess salt and alcohol intake. The pathophysiology underlying true TRH remains unclear. In this article, we discuss the factors responsible for apparent treatment resistance in hypertension and the management strategies, including device therapy and newer antihypertensive agents that are likely to be available in the near future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thakare et al. (2026) conducted a review in Treatment-Resistant Hypertension. The provided text is a supplementary reference list for a review on management strategies for treatment-resistant hypertension and does not contain primary clinical trial data.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: