Key result
Resistant hypertension was associated with significantly lower hyperaemic myocardial blood flow and myocardial perfusion reserve compared to controlled hypertension (both P < 0.001).
Why the study?
Impaired MPR may precede coronary atherosclerosis and represent an early manifestation of developing CAD in resistant hypertension, prompting evaluation of their relationship after balancing for coronary risk factors.
Does resistant hypertension reduce myocardial perfusion reserve compared to controlled hypertension in patients without overt CAD?
Cohort (n=360)
No
Does resistant hypertension reduce myocardial perfusion reserve compared to controlled hypertension in patients without overt CAD?
Absolute Event Rate: 2.16% vs 2.76%
p-value: p=<0.001
Resistant hypertension is associated with impaired coronary microvascular function (reduced MPR and hyperaemic MBF) even in the absence of overt CAD or myocardial ischemia.
May indicate early microvascular dysfunction in resistant hypertension; leaves open whether MPR assessment informs management or prognosis.
AIMS: Impaired myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) may occur earlier than coronary atherosclerosis and it may be an early manifestation of developing coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with resistant hypertension (RH). We evaluated the relationship between RH and MPR in patients with systemic arterial hypertension after balancing for coronary risk factors. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 360 subjects without overt CAD and normal myocardial perfusion at stress-rest 82Rb positron emission tomography/computed tomography. To account for differences in baseline characteristics between patients with resistant and controlled hypertension, we created a propensity score-matched cohort considering clinical variables and coronary risk factors. Before matching, patients with RH were significantly older, had higher prevalence of male gender and hypercholesterolaemia, and showed significantly lower global hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) and MPR compared with those with controlled hypertension, while baseline MBF and coronary artery calcium (CAC) content were similar in both groups. After matching, there were no significant differences in clinical variables and coronary risk factors between patients with resistant and controlled hypertension, but patients with RH still had lower hyperaemic MBF and MPR (both P < 0.001). At univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses, age, RH, and CAC resulted significant predictors of lower MPR values (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: After balancing clinical characteristic by propensity score analysis, patients with RH had a blunted hyperaemic MBF and MPR compared with patients with controlled hypertension. The identification of impaired MPR could help to identify early structural alterations of the arterial walls in patients with RH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gaudieri et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Resistant hypertension (n=360). Resistant hypertension vs. Controlled hypertension was evaluated on Myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) after propensity score matching (p=<0.001). Resistant hypertension was associated with significantly lower hyperaemic myocardial blood flow and myocardial perfusion reserve compared to controlled hypertension (both P < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: