|
 |
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© American Diabetes Association ®, Inc., 2006
Management of Hypertension in Diabetes
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Top
Abstract
EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMPLICATIONS...In Brief
Untreated or poorly controlled hypertension can significantly accelerate the development and progression of both the micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes. Aggressive blood pressure control improves patient outcomes and reduces health care costs. Unfortunately, nearly two-thirds of people with diabetes do not have blood pressure readings within the target range. Effective antihypertensive regimens maximize nonpharmacological therapies, minimize adverse effects on glucose control, lessen the risk of medication-related side-effects, and provide adequate cardiac and renal protection.
|
EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMPLICATIONS OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
Along with hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, and cigarette smoking, hypertension is a major contributor to the development and progression of macrovascular and microvascular complications in people with diabetes.1–5 Compared to the general population, people with diabetes face a two- to fourfold increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD).1,6 Concomitant hypertension triples the already high risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), doubles total mortality and stroke risk, and may be responsible for up to 75% of all CVD events in people with diabetes.6 Similarly, hypertension significantly accelerates the progression of diabetic nephropathy, retinopathy, and neuropathy.3–5 Of particular importance, systolic blood pressure is a stronger predictor than diastolic blood pressure for both CVD and renal complications.3,6
In the United States, nearly 75% of adults with diabetes take
antihypertensive medication or have a blood pressure 
130/80 mmHg, the
currently accepted treatment threshold for hypertension in people with
diabetes.3,7–12
In contrast, the prevalence of hypertension (blood pressure 140/90 mmHg)
in the general U.S. population is only
30%.10 In people
with type 2 diabetes, the prevalence of hypertension is 50% at the time of
diagnosis, increasing to 80% in the presence of microalbuminuria and to >
90% with
macroalbuminuria.3
Although population-based data are limited, between 30 and 43% of adults with
type 1 diabetes also have concomitant hypertension; onset of hypertension in
these patients frequently correlates with the onset of
albuminuria.13
|
HYPERTENSION TREATMENT IN DIABETES: EFFICACY AND GOAL BLOOD PRESSURE |
|---|
Reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension and diabetes decreases both macrovascular and microvascular complications. Clinical trials using a variety of antihypertensive agents have demonstrated that modest reductions in blood pressure of just 9–11 mmHg systolic and 2–9 mmHg diastolic decrease CVD events by 34–69% and microvascular complications (retinopathy and nephropathy) by 26–46% within just 2–5 years.14–18
How far should blood pressure be lowered in people with diabetes? Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated substantially improved CVD and microvascular outcomes with a target diastolic blood pressure close to or < 80 mmHg.16,17 For the prognostically more important systolic blood pressure, a single randomized clinical trial18 and prospective observational data from three other clinical trials19–21 support improved CVD and microvascular outcomes with a target systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg. Based on these data, most international guidelines now recommend a target blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg for people with diabetes.3,8–12 For diabetic patients with proteinuria and a total urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio > 500 mg/g, the National Kidney Foundation recommends a target systolic blood pressure < 125 mmHg.3 Limited data suggest possible worsening of both renal and CVD outcomes if systolic blood pressure is lowered to < 110 mmHg.3,21
Most diabetic hypertensive patients with normal renal function require a combination of two to three antihypertensive agents to lower blood pressure to < 130/80 mmHg; patients with concomitant chronic kidney disease may require three or more agents.3,10
Intensive blood pressure control is an essential component of a multifactorial strategy to reduce CVD and microvascular complications in diabetes. The Steno 2 study22 targeted intensive goals for hypertension, hyperglycemia, and dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria. After 8 years, the combined interventions reduced CVD events by 53% and major microvascular complications by 58–63%. An economic modeling study based on clinical trial data23 has suggested that intensive hypertension control in diabetes is actually cost-saving; it improves health outcomes and reduces total health care costs. In contrast, intensive glycemic and dyslipidemia control are only cost-effective; they improve health outcomes but result in some increase in health care costs.23
|
INADEQUATE CONTROL OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
Unfortunately, outside of research settings, control of vascular risk factors is inadequate in people with diabetes. In community-based studies24–26 only 28–36% of diabetic hypertensive patients have their blood pressure controlled to < 130/80 mmHg, primarily because of poor control of systolic blood pressure. Similar levels of inadequate blood pressure control have been noted in type 1 diabetic populations.13,27 Of great concern, only 4–10% of diabetic patients meet the combined American Diabetes Association goals for blood pressure (< 130/80 mmHg), LDL cholesterol (< 100 mg/dl), and hemoglobin A1c (< 7.0%).24–26
Disease, patient, and clinician factors contribute to poor blood pressure control in diabetes. Hypertension, particularly elevated systolic blood pressure, may be intrinsically more difficult to control in the diabetic population. In community settings, patients with diabetes are less likely to have their blood pressure controlled, despite receiving more antihypertensive medications.28 Similar observations have been made in clinical trials where diabetic subjects required 50% more antihypertensive medication to control blood pressure.29 Still, in the recent GEMINI (Glycemic Effects in Diabetes Mellitus: Carvedilol-Metoprolol Comparison in Hypertensives) clinical trial,30 investigators were able to lower blood pressure to < 130/80 mmHg in 68% of the 1,235 subjects with diabetes, about twice the control rate noted in community studies. Additional factors must contribute to inadequate blood pressure control in people with diabetes.
Patient factors contribute to poor blood pressure control through nonadherence to medications and follow-up visits. Health care costs may reduce adherence by some patients. Inadequate patient knowledge about hypertension and CVD risk is likely to be an additional contributor. In a 2002 survey,31 nearly two-thirds of people with diabetes did not consider CVD to be a common complication of diabetes, and more than half did not consider themselves personally at risk for CVD. Only 5% recognized that reducing blood pressure could lower CVD risk.
Clinician inertia—the failure to increase the dose or number of
medications at office visits for patients who are not meeting therapeutic
goals—is an important contributor to poor control of blood pressure in
people with diabetes. In one study at a U.S. academic medical center, only 30%
of diabetic hypertensive patients with systolic blood pressure above goal had
their antihypertensive regimen increased during the subsequent
year.32 In a
multicenter study of U.S. academic medical
centers,26 only 10%
of untreated diabetic patients with a blood pressure 130/80 mmHg, and
only 15% of those with a blood pressure 140/90 mmHg, were started on
antihypertensive medication.
The reasons for clinician inertia have not been defined. Inadequate knowledge may be one contributing factor. In a 2002 survey of U.S. physicians,31 63% incorrectly ranked glycemic control as the top priority to prevent CVD in diabetic patients. Only 22% correctly identified control of hypertension as the most cost-effective intervention to prevent CVD. Time pressure during short office visits with complicated patients with diabetes may also contribute to clinician inertia.26
|
DIAGNOSIS OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
Hypertension should be diagnosed accurately, and it should be treated promptly in people with diabetes because they are at high risk for adverse CVD and renal outcomes. The recent Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial33 compared valsartan and amlodipine-based treatment regimens in high-risk hypertensive patients, many of whom had diabetes. Lowering systolic blood pressure to < 140 mmHg by 6 months of treatment reduced stroke by 45%, CVD events by 25%, and mortality by 21% compared to subjects whose systolic blood pressure remained
140 mmHg at 6 months.
To avoid a potentially dangerous delay in diagnosis, it is reasonable to
confirm a diagnosis of hypertension in people with diabetes if the average
blood pressure is 130/80 mmHg on two successive visits scheduled within 1
month.8,9
Blood pressure should be measured carefully with standardized patient
preparation, accurate equipment, and appropriate technique as reviewed in
recent clinical practice
guidelines.9,34
At each visit, if initial blood pressure is 130/80 mmHg, three readings
should be taken, with the first reading discarded and the latter two averaged.
Standing blood pressure measurement should also be obtained to screen for
significant orthostatic reductions.
Currently, there are insufficient data to determine the role of home- or self-monitoring of blood pressure or 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the diagnosis of hypertension in people with diabetes.9 However, diagnostic algorithms extrapolated from studies in nondiabetic populations have been proposed.35
|
NONPHARMACOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
There are few data concerning the effects of lifestyle modification on blood pressure in people with diabetes and hypertension. In the general hypertensive population, comprehensive application of the lifestyle modifications listed in Table 1 is predicted to lower systolic blood pressure by 5 mmHg, a reduction similar to that observed with low-dose, single-drug antihypertensive therapy.9
|
Helpful patient education materials for office use can be obtained online at www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/hbp/hbp_low/index.htm. People with diabetes who are older than 35 years of age should not embark on exercise programs more vigorous than walking without consideration of an exercise test.36 Cycling or swimming programs rather than walking programs should be considered in the presence of significant peripheral neuropathy or major foot deformities.36
Given the modest efficacy of lifestyle modifications and the importance of
prompt blood pressure control, diabetic hypertensive patients with blood
pressure 140/90 mmHg or with albuminuria or other target organ damage
(TOD) should initiate pharmacological therapy concurrently with lifestyle
modification at the second office visit. Patients with blood pressures
130–139/80–89 mmHg and no albuminuria or TOD may have a 3-month
trial of lifestyle modification alone. Pharmacological therapy should then be
initiated if blood pressure is not lowered to < 130/80
mmHg.8 Lifestyle
modification should be reemphasized at each office visit.
|
PHARMACOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
Clinical trials including large numbers of patients with both diabetes and hypertension have demonstrated reductions in CVD events and microvascular complications, using thiazide diuretics, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), dihydropyridine (DHP) and nondihydropyridine (nonDHP) calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and ß-blockers.3,10 More recent randomized studies in subjects with diabetes have investigated whether any particular antihypertensive agent more effectively reduces either CVD or renal complications independently of its ability to lower blood pressure.3,20,37–39
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Axis Blockade
The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone (RAA) axis is a multiorgan endocrine
system that regulates electrolytes, blood volume, and blood pressure. The
pharmacological targets in this system include inhibitors of the production of
angiotensin II (ACE inhibitors), inhibitors of angiotensin II action (ARBs),
and the aldosterone receptor antagonists spironolactone and eplerenone.
ACE inhibitors16,18 and ARBs40 have been shown to reduce CVD events in hypertensive diabetic patients. The MICRO-HOPE (Microalbuminuria Cardiovascular Renal Outcomes–Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation substudy) and the PERSUADE (Perindopril Substudy in Coronary Artery Disease and Diabetes)–EUROPA (EUropean trial on Reduction Of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery) trials compared ACE inhibitors with placebo in high-risk subjects with diabetes, many of whom had hypertension.41,42 Both studies found a greater reduction in cardiovascular end points with ACE inhibitors than would have been expected through blood pressure lowering alone, although this conclusion has been challenged.43 However, a specific cardioprotective antiatherosclerotic effect for ACE inhibitors and ARBs independent of blood pressure lowering has not been confirmed by data from the diabetic subgroup of the very large Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)39 or by a prospective meta-analysis of 27 randomized trials with 33,395 hypertensive diabetic subjects.38 The meta-analysis found that ACE inhibitors, ARBs, CCBs, and diuretics/ß-blockers (diuretic and ß-blocker studies were pooled together for this analysis) had similar efficacy to prevent major CVD events.38 The extent of blood pressure lowering was a more important determinant of CVD prevention than any specific antihypertensive treatment regimen.38
On the other hand, ACE inhibitors and ARBs do have specific renoprotective
effects independent of the level of blood pressure or the extent of blood
pressure lowering, at least in some subgroups of diabetic
patients.3,8–10,37,44
In hypertensive diabetic patients with macroalbuminuria and renal
insufficiency, ACE inhibitors and ARBs slow progression to end-stage renal
disease (ESRD) by 
25% compared to other antihypertensive agents; this
renoprotective effect may be lost or muted as renal failure progresses and
serum creatinine rises to > 3.0
mg/dl.3 An abrupt
decline in renal function or a significant increase in serum potassium may
occur in patients with renal insufficiency treated with these agents, and
frequent monitoring (1–2 weeks) of electrolytes and renal function is
recommended after the initiation or upward titration of these drugs. A
persistent decline in renal function of > 30% may require discontinuation
of therapy.3 A
recent study of normo-albuminuric, hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients found
that an ACE inhibitor delayed the development of persistent microalbuminuria
compared to the CCB verapamil, despite similar levels of blood pressure
lowering.44 Another
recent study demonstrated that ACE inhibitors and ARBs equivalently slow the
progressive loss of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in patients with diabetic
nephropathy.45 When
macroalbuminuria is detected (> 300 mg/day), clinical trials support the
use of ARBs in people with type 2 diabetes and ACE inhibitors in patients with
type 1
diabetes.3
Whether the independent renoprotective effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs
extend to all patients with diabetes and hypertension or only to those with
albuminuria has not been conclusively determined. In the 12,063 diabetic
participants in the ALLHAT hypertension
trial,37 there was
no difference in the percentage of patients progressing to ESRD or to a
decline of 50% in GFR when comparing an ACE inhibitor or a CCB to a
thiazide over 4.9 years. Many of these patients had baseline mild to moderate
renal insufficiency, although their albuminuria status was not determined.
Combining ACE inhibitors with ARBs is theoretically attractive. Addition of an ARB to an ACE inhibitor could counteract the incomplete suppression of angiotensin II seen with ACE inhibitors; adding an ACE inhibitor to an ARB would preserve the inhibition of bradykinin degradation by the ACE inhibitor. However, clinical benefits of combination ACE inhibitor and ARB therapy have not yet been fully documented.3,46,47 When larger doses of longer-acting ACE inhibitors have been used, for example lisinopril 40 mg/day, there is usually no additive effect from the ARB on blood pressure.46,47 Combination therapy may, however, reduce albuminuria by 30–40% compared to monotherapy with either drug.47 Pending the results of additional clinical trials, combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and ARB is not currently recommended.3
High circulating levels of aldosterone increase albuminuria and worsen renal insufficiency in diabetic nephropathy patients treated with ACE inhibitors or ARBs.48 Preliminary, short-term randomized clinical trials have been conducted with low-dose (25 mg/day) spironolactone added to maximal ACE inhibitor and/or ARB therapy in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy.49,50 These studies have demonstrated reductions in blood pressure of up to 10 mmHg systolic and 5 mmHg diastolic along with 33% reductions in albuminuria.49,50 However, aldosterone blockade carries a considerable risk of severe hyperkalemia in diabetic patients with renal insufficiency. Treatment of hypertensive diabetic patients with aldosterone antagonists cannot be recommended until long-term cardiovascular and renal benefits have been demonstrated and the safety of these agents has been confirmed.51
Diuretics
The thiazide diuretics hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone, and indapamide
have been shown to reduce cardiovascular disease events in subjects with
diabetes and
hypertension.10,14,39,52
The ALLHAT trial39
demonstrated that compared to diabetic subjects taking lisinopril or
amlodipine, the subjects assigned to chlorthalidone had an equivalent
reduction in major cardiovascular end points but also had a significantly
lower risk of heart failure. When administered as monotherapy to
African-American hypertensive subjects, thiazides lower blood pressure more
effectively than ACE inhibitors or
ARBs.9–12
Thiazide-induced hypokalemia may mitigate some of the cardiovascular benefits
seen with
thiazides53 and may
further impair glucose metabolism; careful monitoring and replacement of
potassium is essential.
Thiazides progressively lose their antihypertensive effectiveness as
estimated GFR declines below 45 ml/min per 1.73 m2, approximately
corresponding to a serum creatinine 1.8 mg/dl in men and 1.6 mg/dl
in women.3 (Using
age, race, sex, and serum creatinine, an estimated GFR can be determined at
the following website:
http://newtech.kidney.org/professionals/kdqi/gfr_calculator.cfm.)
Loop diuretics (furosemide, bumetanide, or torsemide) should be substituted
for thiazides at this level of renal function. Although their efficacy to
reduce CVD events in hypertensive patients has not been studied, loop
diuretics effectively lower extracellular volume and blood pressure in
patients with hypertension and renal insufficiency. Short-acting loop
diuretics such as furosemide or bumetanide require twice-daily administration
for treatment of hypertension; the longer-acting loop diuretic torsemide may
be administered once
daily.3
CCBs
Both the nonDHP (diltiazem and verapamil) and the DHP CCBs (amlodipine,
felodipine, and others) reduce CVD events in people with diabetes and
hypertension.15,17,18,20
With the possible exception of new-onset heart failure, CCBs prevent CVD
events as effectively as the other antihypertensive drug
classes.38 NonDHP
CCBs significantly reduce albuminuria and may slow the progression of
proteinuric renal
disease.54 In
contrast, DHP CCBs inconsistently reduce albuminuria and are less effective
than ACE inhibitors or ARBs in slowing the progression of diabetic
nephropathy.54
However, DHP CCBs effectively lower blood pressure and can be safely combined
with an ACE inhibitor or ARB to slow the progression of diabetic
nephropathy.54
ß-Blockers
In the general hypertensive population, ß-blockers appear to prevent
stroke less effectively than other antihypertensive drug classes. A recent
meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials with 105,951 patients comparing
ß-blockers with other antihypertensive drugs found that ß-blockers
were 16% less effective for preventing stroke; ß-blockers were equally
effective compared with other drugs for preventing myocardial
infarction.55 For
diabetic hypertensive people with left ventricular hypertrophy, a large
clinical trial found that the ARB losartan reduced CVD events by 25% compared
to the ß-blocker
atenolol.40 Even in
a study of diabetic hypertensive subjects with stable coronary artery disease,
a ß-blocker–based regimen did not reduce CVD events any more
effectively than a verapamil-based
regimen.20 Finally,
ß-blockers appear to be less effective than other antihypertensive agents
for lowering systolic blood
pressure.56
Blood pressure lowering with carvedilol or metoprolol reduces microalbuminuria by 43 and 30%, respectively, when added to ACE inhibitors or ARBs.57 However, carvedilol is nearly 50% more effective than metoprolol for preventing progression from normoalbuminuria to microalbuminuria.57 Unlike metoprolol or atenolol, carvedilol does not adversely affect glycemic control or serum lipoprotein levels.30 ß-Blockers do not increase the severity of hypoglycemia, and any adverse influence on insulin resistance may be overcome by modifying the glucose-lowering regimen. Because acetylcholine is the neurotransmitter involved in sweating and is not affected by ß-blockers, patients taking these drugs can monitor this symptom as a warning sign for hypoglycemia.
Because they are less effective than other agents for lowering blood pressure and preventing stroke, ß-blockers should probably be used as third- or fourth-line antihypertensive agents.9,10 However, for patients who have concomitant heart failure or a prior myocardial infarction, ß-blockers should be used as initial therapy in combination with either ACE inhibitors or ARBs.9,10
-Blockers
In the ALLHAT trial, diabetic subjects who received doxazosin as their
initial antihypertensive agent had an 85% higher incidence of new-onset heart
failure compared to subjects assigned chlorthalidone; there was no difference
in the incidence of fatal/nonfatal myocardial
infarction.58
Additionally, -blockers do not appear to reduce microalbumin excretion
in people with diabetes. Based on these observations, ß-blockers should
not be used as monotherapy to treat hypertension even in men who have
concomitant benign prostatic hypertrophy. These drugs should probably be
reserved to treat patients in whom blood pressure cannot be successfully
lowered with other agents or who are intolerant of other agents.
|
MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION IN DIABETES |
|---|
Figure 1 presents an approach to hypertension management in diabetes.3,8–12,59 A diagnosis of hypertension is confirmed if carefully measured blood pressure is
130/80 mmHg on two office visits over a 1-month period. If average
blood pressure is 140/90 mmHg or if there is albuminuria or TOD,
simultaneous pharmacological and lifestyle modification therapy should be
initiated at the second office visit. If initial blood pressure averages
130–139/80–89 mmHg and albuminuria and TOD are absent, an initial
trial of lifestyle modification limited to 3 months is
reasonable.8,9
|
For most patients, select a once-daily ACE inhibitor or ARB as initial pharmacological treatment; gradually titrate the dose to the moderate to high doses used in clinical trials.3,8–12 Alternatively, if TOD and albuminuria are absent, a low-dose thiazide may be used as initial treatment, particularly in African Americans. If the baseline blood pressure is
150/90 mmHg, consider initial combination therapy with
an ACE inhibitor or ARB and a thiazide because monotherapy is unlikely to
reach the goal blood pressure of <130/80 mmHg. Patients who have heart
failure or who are post-myocardial infarction should initially be treated with
an ACE inhibitor and
ß-blocker.10
Patients should be seen monthly with adjustment of the therapeutic regimen
at each visit until office-measured blood pressure is < 130/80 mmHg on two
consecutive visits. If out-of-office blood pressure measurements are utilized
to adjust treatment, note that home- or self-monitored blood pressure is
5/5 mmHg lower than office-measured blood pressure; 24-hour ambulatory blood
pressure is 10/10 mmHg lower than office-measured blood pressure. The goals
for these out-of-office blood pressures are therefore < 125/75 mmHg and
< 120/70 mmHg, respectively, for patients with
diabetes.34,35
For most patients, a thiazide diuretic will be second-step therapy; a loop diuretic should be substituted for the thiazide if significant renal insufficiency is present. A once-daily formulation of a nonDHP CCB (verapamil or diltiazem) should generally be third-step therapy.3 If a fourth agent is required, addition of a once-daily DHP CCB may more effectively lower blood pressure than a ß-blocker.59 If ß-blockers are added to the regimen, they should be combined with DHP CCBs rather than nonDHP CCBs to avoid bradyarrhythmia.
Patients with apparently resistant hypertension should be evaluated for adherence, interacting medications (especially alcohol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents),60 and associated conditions such as sleep apnea.10 A 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor study should be considered to detect whether elevated blood pressure is limited to the office setting ("white coat" hypertension).9 Consideration should then be given to consultation with a hypertension specialist.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Barry Stults, MD, is a professor of medicine, and Robert E. Jones, MD, FACP, FACE, is an adjunct associate professor of medicine at the University of Utah School of Medicine in Salt Lake City.
Note of disclosure: Dr. Stults has received honoraria for speaking engagements from and has served as a consultant to Pfizer, and Dr. Jones is employed by Sanofi-Aventis Group. Both companies manufacture pharmaceutical products for the treatment of hypertension.
|
References |
|---|
-
1 Beckman JA,
Crenger MA, Libby P: Diabetes and atherosclerosis: epidemiology,
pathophysiology, and management. JAMA287
: 2570–2581,2002
2 Libby P, Nathan
DM, Abraham K, Brunzell JD, Fradkin JE, Haffner SM, Hsueh W, Rewers M, Roberts
BT, Savage PJ, Skarlatos S, Wassef M, Rabadan-Diehl C: Report of the National
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases Working Group on Cardiovascular Complications of Type 1
Diabetes Mellitus. Circulation111
: 3489–3493,2005
3 National Kidney Foundation: Guideline 8: pharmacological therapy: diabetic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis 43 (Suppl. 1):S142 –S159, 2004
4 Fong DS, Aiello
LP, Ferris FL 3rd, Klein R: Diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes
Care 27:2540
–2553, 2004
5 Tesfaye S,
Chaturvedi N, Eaton SE, Ward JD, Manes C, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, Witte DR,
Fuller JH: Vascular risk factors and diabetic neuropathy. N Engl J
Med 352:341
–350, 2005
6 Sowers JR, Epstein
M, Frolich ED: Diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease: an update.
Hypertension 37:1053
–1059, 2001
7 Centers for Disease Control: National Diabetes Fact Sheet 1/31/05 [article online]. Available from www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/estimates.htm. Accessed 24 July 2005
8 American Diabetes Association: Standards
of medical care in diabetes (Position Statement). Diabetes
Care 28 (Suppl. 1):S4
–S36, 2005
9 Hemmelgarn BR, McAlister FA, Myers MG, McKay DW, Bolli P, Abbott C, Schiffrin EL, Grover S, Honos G, Lebel M, Mann K, Wilson T, Penner B, Tremblay G, Tobe SW, Feldman RD: The 2005 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension. Can J Cardiol21 : 645–656,2005[Medline]
10 Chobanian AV,
Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, Jones DW, Materson BJ,
Oparil S, Wright JT Jr, Roccella EJ: Seventh report of the Joint National
Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood
pressure. Hypertension 42:1206
–1252, 2003
11 Williams B, Poulter NR, Brown MJ, Davis M, McInnes GT, Potter JF, Sever PS, McG Thom S: Guidelines for the management of hypertension: report of the Fourth Working Party of the British Hypertension Society, 2004. J Human Hypertens 18:139 –185, 2004[Medline]
12 European Societies of Hypertension and Cardiology: Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension, 2003. J Hypertens21 : 1011–1052,2003[Medline]
13 Maahs DM, Kinney
GL, Wadwa P, Snell-Bergeon JK, Dabelea D, Hokanson J, Ehrlich J, Garg S, Eckel
RH, Rewers MJ: Hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control in
an adult type 1 diabetes population and a comparable general population.
Diabetes Care 28:301
–306, 2005
14 Curb JD, Pressel SL, Cutler JA, Savage PJ, Applegate WB, Black H, Camel G, Davis BR, Frost PH, Gonzalez N, Guthrie G, Oberman A, Rutan GH, Stamler J: Effect of diuretic-based antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular disease risk in older diabetic patients with isolated systolic hypertension. JAMA 276:1886 –1892, 1996[Abstract]
15 Tuomilehto J,
Rastenyte D, Birkenhager WH, Thijs L, Antikainen R, Bulpitt CJ, Fletcher AE,
Forette F, Goldhaber A, Palatini P, Sarti C, Fagard R: Effects of
calcium-channel blockade in older patients with diabetes and systolic
hypertension. N Engl J Med 340:677
–684, 1999
16 UKPDS Group: UK Prospective Diabetes
Study 38: tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and
microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. BMJ317
: 703–713,1998
17 Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, Dahlof B, Elmfeldt D, Julius S, Menard J, Rahn KH, Wedel H, Westerling S: Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment randomized trial. Lancet 351:1755 –1762, 1998[Medline]
18 Schrier RW, Estacio RO, Esler A, Mehler P: Effects of aggressive blood pressure control in normotensive type 2 diabetics on albuminuria, retinopathy, and strokes. Kidney Int 61:1086 –1097, 2002[Medline]
19 Adler AI, Stratton
IM, Neil HA, Judkin JS, Matthews DR, Cull CA, Wright AD, Turner RC, Holman RR:
Association of systolic blood pressure with macrovascular and microvascular
complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 36): prospective observational study.
BMJ 321:412
–419, 2000
20 Bakris GL, Gaxiola
E, Messerli FH, Mancia G, Erdine S, Cooper-DeHoff R, Pepine CJ: Clinical
outcomes in the diabetic cohort of the International Verapamil SR-Trandolapril
Study. Hypertension 44:643
–648, 2004
21 Berl T, Hunsicker
LG, Lewis JB, Pfeffer MA, Porush JG, Rouleau JL, Drury PL, Esmatjes E, Hricik
D, Pohl M, Raz I, Vanhille P, Wiegmann TB, Wolfe BM, Locatelli F, Goldhaber
SZ, Lewis EJ: Impact of achieved blood pressure on cardiovascular outcomes in
the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial. J Am Soc
Nephrol 16:2170
–2179, 2005
22 Gaede P, Vedel P,
Larsen N, Jensen GV, Parving HH, Pedersen O: Multifactorial intervention and
cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J
Med 348:383
–393, 2003
23 CDC Diabetes Cost-effectiveness Group:
Cost-effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension
control, and serum cholesterol level reduction for type 2 diabetes.
JAMA 287:2542
–2551, 2002
24 Saydah SH, Fradkin
J, Cowie CC: Poor control of risk factors for vascular disease among adults
with previously diagnosed diabetes. JAMA291
: 335–342,2004
25 McFarlane SI, Castro J, Kaur J, Shin JJ, Kelling D Jr, Farag A, Simon N, El-Atat F, Sacerdote A, Basta E, Flack J, Bakris G, Sowers JR: Control of blood pressure and other cardiovascular risk factors at different practice settings: outcomes of care provided to diabetic women compared to men. J Clin Hypertens 7:73 –80, 2005
26 Grant RW, Buse JB,
Meigs JB: Quality of diabetes care in U.S. academic medical centers: low rates
of medical regimen change. Diabetes Care28
: 337–342,2005
27 Zgibor JC, Wilson
RR, Orchard TJ: Has control of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension in type 1
diabetes improved over time? Diabetes Care28
: 521–526,2005
28 Majernick TG, Zacker C, Madden NA, Belletti DA, Arcona S: Correlates of hypertension control in a primary care setting. Am J Hypertens17 : 915–920,2004[Medline]
29 Brown MJ,
Castaigne A, de Leeuw PW, Mancia G, Palmer CR, Rosenthal T, Ruilope LM:
Influence of diabetes and type of hypertension on response to antihypertensive
treatment. Hypertension 35:1038
–1042, 2000
30 Bakris G, Fonseca
V, Katholi RE, McGill JB, Messerli FH, Phillips RA, Raskin P, Wright JT Jr,
Oakes R, Lukas MA, Anderson KM, Bell DS: Metabolic effects of carvedilol vs.
metoprolol in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension: a
randomized clinical trial. JAMA292
: 2227–2236,2004
31 Merz CN, Buse JB,
Tuncer D, Twillman BG: Physician attitudes and practices and patient awareness
of the cardiovascular complications of diabetes. J Am Coll
Cardiol 40:1877
–1881, 2002
32 Grant RW, Cagliero E, Dubey AK, Gildesgame C, Chueh HC, Barry MJ, Singer DE, Nathan DM, Meigs JB: Clinical inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes metabolic risk factors. Diabet Med 21:150 –155, 2004[Medline]
33 Weber MA, Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Brunner HR, Ekman S, Hansson L, Hua T, Laragh JH, McInnes GT, Mitchell L, Plat F, Schork MA, Smith B, Zanchetti A: Blood pressure dependent and independent effects of antihypertensive treatment on clinical events in the VALUE trial. Lancet 363:2049 –2051, 2004[Medline]
34 Pickering TG, Hall
JE, Appel LJ, Falkner BE, Graves J, Hill MN, Jones DW, Kurtz T, Sheps SG,
Rocella EJ: Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans and
experimental animals. Part 1. Blood pressure measurement in humans.
Hypertension 45:142
–161, 2005
35 Grewal J, Lonn E: Surrogates of surrogates: the story of hypertension and 24-hour blood pressure monitoring. Can J Cardiol 21:639 –642, 2005[Medline]
36 American Diabetes Association: Physical activity/exercise and diabetes (Position Statement). Diabetes Care 27 (Suppl. 1):S58 –S62, 2004[Medline]
37 Rahman M, Pressel
S, Davis BR, Nwachuku, C, Wright JT Jr, Whelton PK, Barzilay J, Bataman V,
Eckfeldt JH, Farber M, Henriquez M, Kopy TN, Louis GT, Saklayen M, Stanford C,
Walworth C, Ward H, Weimann T, for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group:
Renal outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients treated with an
angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or a calcium channel blocker vs a
diuretic: a report from the ALLHAT Trial. Arch Intern
Med 165:936
–946, 2005
38 Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists'
Collaboration: Effects of different blood pressure-lowering
regimens on major cardiovascular events in individuals with and without
diabetes mellitus: results of prospectively designed overviews of randomized
trials. Arch Intern Med 165:1410
–1419, 2005
39 Whelton PK,
Barzilay J, Cushman WC, Davis BR, Iliamathi E, Dostis JB, Leenen FH, Louis GT,
Margolis KL, Mathis DE, Moloo J, Nwachuku C, Parebianco D, Parish DC, Pressel
S, Simmons DL, Thadani U, ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Clinical
outcomes in antihypertensive treatment of type 2 diabetes, impaired fasting
glucose concentration, and normoglycemia: Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering
Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Arch Intern
Med 165:1401
–1409, 2005
40 Lindholm LH, Ibsen H, Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Beevers G, de Faire U, Fyhrquist F, Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Kristiansson K, Lederballe-Pedersen O, Neiminen MS, Omvik P, Oparil S, Wedel H, Aurup P, Edelman J, Snapinn S, LIFE Study Group: Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in Hypertension study (LIFE): a randomized trial against atenolol. Lancet359 : 1004–1010,2002[Medline]
41 Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators: Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet355 : 253–259,2000[Medline]
42 Daly CA, Fox KM,
Remme WJ, Bertrand ME, Ferrari R, Simoons ML, on behalf of the EUROPA
Investigators: The effect of perindopril on cardiovascular morbidity and
mortality in patients with diabetes in the EUROPA study: results from the
PERSUADE substudy. Eur Heart J26
: 1369–1378,2005
43 Svensson P, de Faire U, Sleight P, Yusuf S, Ostergren J: Comparative effects of ramipril on ambulatory and office blood pressures: a HOPE substudy. Hypertension 38:E28 –E32, 2001.[Medline]
44 Ruggenenti P,
Fassi A, Ilieva AP, Bruno S, Iliev IP, Brusegan V, Rubis N, Gherardi G,
Arnoldi F, Ganeva M, Ehe-Iordache B, Gaspari F, Perna A, Bossi A, Trevisan R,
Dodesini AR, Remuzzi G, Bergamo Nephrologic Diabetes Complications Trial
(BENEDICT) Investigators: Preventing microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes.
N Engl J Med 351:1941
–1951, 2004
45 Barnett AH, Bain
SC, Bouter P, Karlberg B, Madsbad S, Jervell J, Mustonen J, Diabetics Exposed
to Telmisartan and Enalapril Study Group: Angiotensin-receptor blockade versus
converting-enzyme inhibition in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N
Engl J Med 351:1952
–1961, 2004
46 Andersen NH,
Poulsen PL, Knudsen ST, Poulsen SH, Eiskjaer H, Hansen KW, Helleberg K,
Mogensen CE: Long-term dual blockade with candesartan and lisinopril in
hypertensive patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care28
: 273–277,2005
47 Doulton TWR, He
FJ, MacGregor GA: Systematic review of combined angiotensin-converting enzyme
inhibition and angiotensin receptor blockade in hypertension.
Hypertension 45:880
–886, 2005
48 Schjoedt KJ, Andersen S, Rossing P, Tarnow L, Parving HH: Aldosterone escape during angiotensin II receptor blockade in diabetic nephropathy is associated with enhanced decline in GFR. Diabetologia47 : 1936–1939,2004[Medline]
49 Rossing K,
Schjoedt KJ, Smidt UM, Boomsma F, Parving H-H: Beneficial effects of adding
spironolactone to recommended antihypertensive treatment in diabetic
nephropathy: a randomized, double-masked, cross-over study.
Diabetes Care 28:2106
–2112, 2005
50 Rachmani R, Slavachevsky I, Amit M, Levi Z, Kedar Y, Berla M, Ravid M: The effect of spironolactone, cilazapril, and their combination on albuminuria in patients with hypertension and diabetic nephropathy is independent of blood pressure reduction: a randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med21 : 471–475,2004[Medline]
51 Black HR: Evolving role of aldosterone blockers alone and in combination with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers in hypertension management: a review of mechanistic and clinical data. Am Heart J 147:564 –572, 2004[Medline]
52 PROGRESS Collaborative Group: Randomized trial of perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischemic attack. Lancet 358:1033 –1041, 2002
53 Franse LV, Pahor
M, DiBari M, Somes GW, Cushman WC, Applegate WB: Hypokalemia associated with
diuretic use and cardiovascular events in the Systolic Hypertension in the
Elderly Program. Hypertension35
: 1025–1030,2000
54 Nathan S, Pepine
CJ, Bakris GL: Calcium antagonists: effects on cardio-renal risk in
hypertensive patients. Hypertension46
: 637–642,2005
55 Lindholm LH, Carlberg B, Samuelsson O: Should beta-blockers remain first choice in the treatment of primary hypertension? A meta-analysis. Lancet 366:1545 –1553, 2005[Medline]
56 Morgan TO, Anderson AIE, MacInnis RJ: ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium blockers, and diuretics for the control of systolic hypertension. Am J Hypertension 14:241 –247, 2001[Medline]
57 Bakris GL, Fonseca
V, Katholi RE, McGill JB, Messerli F, Phillips RA, Raskin P, Wright JT Jr,
Waterhouse B, Lucas MA, Anderson KM, Bell DSH, for the GEMINI Investigators:
Differential effects of ß-Blockers on albuminuria in patients with type 2
diabetes. Hypertension 46:1309
–1315, 2005
58 Barzilay JI, Davis BR, Bettencourt J, Margolis KL, Goff DC Jr, Black H, Habib G, Ellsworth A, Force RW, Wiegmann T, Ciocon JO, Basile JN, ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Cardiovascular outcomes using doxazosin vs. chlorthalidone for the treatment of hypertension in older adults with and without glucose disorders: a report from the ALLHAT study. J Clin Hypertens6 : 116–125,2004[Medline]
59 Bakris GL, Williams M, Dworkin L, Elliott WJ, Epstein M, Toto R, Tuttle K, Douglas J, Hsuch W, Sowers J: Preserving renal function in adults with hypertension and diabetes: a consensus approach. Am J Kidney Dis36 : 646–661,2000[Medline]
60 Savers JR, White
WB, Pitt B, Whelton A, Simons LS, Winer N, Kivitz A, Van Ingen H, Brabant T,
Fort JG: The effects of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory therapy on 24-hour blood pressure in patients with
hypertension, osteoarthritis, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arch
Intern Med 165:161
–168, 2005
61 Whelton PK, He J,
Appel LJ, Cutler JA, Havas S, Kotchen TA, Roccella EJ, Stout R, Vallbona C,
Winston MC, Karimbakas J, the National Blood Pressure Education Program
Coordinating Committee: Primary prevention of hypertension: clinical and
public health advisory from the National High Blood Pressure Education
Program. JAMA 288:1882
–1888, 2002
CiteULike 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Related Article:
- Hypertension in Diabetes: Controlling a Critical Comorbid Condition
- Samuel L. Abbate
Diabetes Spectr 2006 19: 17.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Diabetes | Diabetes Care | Clinical Diabetes | Diabetes Spectrum |