Key result
Programmable Hypertension Control therapy significantly decreased office systolic blood pressure by 16 mm Hg and 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure by 10 mm Hg at 3 months (P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does pacemaker-based Programmable Hypertension Control (PHC) therapy reduce systolic blood pressure in patients requiring a pacemaker with persistent hypertension?
Does pacemaker-based Programmable Hypertension Control (PHC) therapy reduce systolic blood pressure in patients requiring a pacemaker with persistent hypertension?
Mean Difference: -16
p-value: p=<0.01
Pacemaker-based Programmable Hypertension Control therapy significantly reduces office and ambulatory systolic blood pressure in patients with persistent hypertension despite medical therapy.
BP reductions support hypothesis generation for programmable hypertension control; randomized trials needed before practice change.
Background Many patients requiring a pacemaker have persistent hypertension with systolic blood pressures above recommended levels. We evaluated a pacemaker‐based Programmable Hypertension Control ( PHC ) therapy that uses a sequence of variably timed shorter and longer atrioventricular intervals. Methods and Results Patients indicated for dual‐chamber pacing with office systolic blood pressure ( oSBP ) >150 mm Hg despite stable medical therapy were implanted with a Moderato™ pulse generator that delivers PHC therapy. Patients were followed for 1 month (Run‐In period) with conventional pacing; those with persistent oSBP >140 mm Hg were included in the study and had PHC therapy activated. The co‐primary efficacy end points were changes in 24‐hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure and oSBP between baseline and 3 months. Safety was assessed by tracking adverse events. Thirty‐five patients met the initial inclusion criteria and underwent Moderato implantation. At 1 month, oSBP was <140 mm Hg in 7 patients who were excluded. PHC was activated in the remaining 27 patients with baseline office blood pressure 166±11/80±10 mm Hg despite an average of 3.2 antihypertensive medications. During the Run‐In period, oSBP and 24‐hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure decreased by 8±13 and 5±12 mm Hg ( P <0.002), respectively. Compared with pre‐ PHC activation measurements, oSBP decreased by another 16±15 mm Hg and 24‐hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure decreased by an additional 10±13 mm Hg (both P <0.01) at 3 months. No device‐related serious adverse effects were noted. Conclusions In pacemaker patients with persistent hypertension despite medical therapy, oSBP and 24‐hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure are decreased by PHC therapy. Initial indications are that this therapy is a safe and promising therapy for such patients. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 02282033.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Neužil et al. (2017) studied Persistent hypertension in patients requiring a pacemaker (n=27). Programmable Hypertension Control (PHC) therapy vs. Pre-PHC activation measurements (baseline) was evaluated on Changes in 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure and office systolic blood pressure between baseline and 3 months (MD -16 mm Hg (oSBP) and -10 mm Hg (24-h ambulatory SBP), p=<0.01). Programmable Hypertension Control therapy significantly decreased office systolic blood pressure by 16 mm Hg and 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure by 10 mm Hg at 3 months (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: