Grenzwerte statt Korridore
Transatlantische Unterschiede bei den Hochdruckleitlinien
Fortbildung Schwerpunkt Hypertonie
First Online:
Ein regelmäßig wiederkehrendes Ritual der letzten Jahrzehnte ist die Neubewertung der Blutdruckziele und Blutdrucktherapie. Die ersten Empfehlungen (JNC1) gab es Ende der 1970er-Jahre. 2017 und 2018 war es wieder soweit, die amerikanischen und europäischen Fachgesellschaften veröffentlichten ihre Hochdruckempfehlungen — mit unterschiedlichen Ergebnissen.
Literatur
- 1.Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(33):3021–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(19):e127–e248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289(19):2560–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL et al. 2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA. 2014;311(5):507–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Verdecchia P, Angeli F, Reboldi G. The SPRINT trial. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2015;9(10):750–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K et al. 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2013;34(28):2159–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Bauer F, Seibert FS, Rohn B et al. Attended Versus Unattended Blood Pressure Measurement in a Real Life Setting. Hypertension. 2018;71(2):243–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.SPRINT Research Group, Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK et al. A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2103–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Textor SC, Schwartz GL. BP Targets in CKD, Mortality, and SPRINT: What Have We Learned? J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;28(9):2561–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Huang C, Dhruva SS, Coppi AC et al. Systolic Blood Pressure Response in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) and ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes): A Possible Explanation for Discordant Trial Results. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(11). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.007509
- 11.Ismail-Beigi F, Craven T, Banerji MA et al. Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9739):419–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M et al. Measurement of blood pressure in the office: recognizing the problem and proposing the solution. Hypertension. 2010;55(2):195–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Agarwal R. Implications of Blood Pressure Measurement Technique for Implementation of Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(2). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.004536
Copyright information
© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019