Key result
ACC/AHA and ESC/ESH hypertension guidelines align substantially despite differing diagnostic cut points and treatment intensity.
Why the study?
The 2017 ACC/AHA and 2018 ESC/ESH hypertension guidelines differ notably in blood pressure cut points and treatment intensity, despite substantial concordance overall.
Despite differences in diagnostic cut points and treatment intensity, there is substantial concordance between the 2017 ACC/AHA and 2018 ESC/ESH hypertension guidelines.
Guidelines differ on hypertension diagnostic thresholds; challenges uniform standards and leaves optimal cut points open for outcome trials.
The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension clinical practice guidelines for management of high blood pressure/hypertension are influential documents. Both guidelines are comprehensive, were developed using rigorous processes, and underwent extensive peer review. The most notable difference between the 2 guidelines is the blood pressure cut points recommended for the diagnosis of hypertension. There are also differences in the timing and intensity of treatment, with the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline recommending a somewhat more intensive approach. Overall, there is substantial concordance in the recommendations provided by the 2 guideline-writing committees, with greater congruity between them than their predecessors. Additional harmonization of future guidelines would help to underscore the commonality of their core recommendations and could serve to catalyze changes in practice that would lead to improved prevention, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, worldwide.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Whelton et al. (2022) conducted a review in High blood pressure/hypertension. 2017 ACC/AHA and 2018 ESC/ESH clinical practice guidelines was evaluated. The 2017 ACC/AHA and 2018 ESC/ESH hypertension guidelines show substantial concordance despite differences in diagnostic cut points and treatment intensity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: