Volume 6, Number 23;  September 7, 2006

Patient:

Session Handout:

Readings:

Link Directly to Fulltext Article at Publisher

<7>

Unique Identifier [PMID]: 12472930

Authors: Cherney D. Straus S.

Institution: Department of Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. dchern@hotmail.com

Title: Management of patients with hypertensive urgencies and emergencies: a systematic review of the literature. [Review] [35 refs]

Source: Journal of General Internal Medicine. 17(12):937-45, 2002 Dec.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Hypertensive urgencies and emergencies are common clinical occurrences in hypertensive patients. Treatment practices vary considerably to because of the lack of evidence supporting the use of one therapeutic agent over another. This paper was designed to review the evidence for various pharmacotherapeutic regimens in the management of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies, in terms of the agents' abilities to reach predetermined "safe" goal blood pressures (BPs), and to prevent adverse events. METHODS: medline was searched from 1966 to 2001, and the reference lists of all the articles were retrieved and searched for relevant references, and experts in the field were contacted to identify other relevant studies. The Cochrane Library was also searched. Studies that were eligible for inclusion in this review were systematic reviews of randomized control trials (RCTs) and individual RCTs, all-or-none studies, systematic reviews of cohort studies and individual cohort studies, and outcomes research. No language restrictions were used. RESULTS: None of the trials included in this review identified an optimal rate of BP lowering in hypertensive emergencies and urgencies. The definitions of hypertensive emergencies and urgencies were not consistent, but emergencies always involved target end-organ damage, and urgencies were without such damage. Measures of outcome were not uniform between studies. The 4 hypertensive emergency and 15 hypertensive urgency studies represented 236 and 1,074 patients, respectively. The evidence indicated a nonsignificant trend toward increased efficacy with urapidil compared to nitroprusside for hypertensive emergencies (number needed to treat [NNT] for urapidil to achieve target BP, 12; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], number of patients needed to harm [NNH], 5 to NNT, 40 compared to nitroprusside). Several medications were efficacious in treating hypertensive urgencies, including: nicardipine (NNT for nicardipine compared to plabebo, 2 in one study [95% CI, 1 to 5] and 1 in another [95% CI, 1 to 1]); lacidipine (NNT, 2; 95% CI, 1 to 8 for lacidipine vs nifedipine) or urapidil (NNT for urapidil compared to enalaprilat and nifedipine, 4; 95% CI, 3 to 6); and nitroprusside and fenoldopam (all patients reached target BP in 2 studies). The studies reported 2 cases of cerebral ischemia secondary to nifedipine. CONCLUSIONS: Many effective agents exist for the treatment of hypertensive crises. Because of the lack of large randomized controlled trials, many questions remain unanswered, such as follow-up times and whether any of the studied agents have mortality benefit. [References: 35]

Publication Type: Journal Article. Review.

 Link Directly to Fulltext Article at Publisher

<12>

Unique Identifier [PMID]: 10893382

Authors: Varon J. Marik PE.

Institution: Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston TX, USA. jvaron@bcm.tmc.edu

Title: The diagnosis and management of hypertensive crises.[see comment]. [Review] [166 refs]

Source: Chest. 118(1):214-27, 2000 Jul.

Abstract: Severe hypertension is a common clinical problem in the United States, encountered in various clinical settings. Although various terms have been applied to severe hypertension, such as hypertensive crises, emergencies, or urgencies, they are all characterized by acute elevations in BP that may be associated with end-organ damage (hypertensive crisis). The immediate reduction of BP is only required in patients with acute end-organ damage. Hypertension associated with cerebral infarction or intracerebral hemorrhage only rarely requires treatment. While nitroprusside is commonly used to treat severe hypertension, it is an extremely toxic drug that should only be used in rare circumstances. Furthermore, the short-acting calcium channel blocker nifedipine is associated with significant morbidity and should be avoided. Today, a wide range of pharmacologic alternatives are available to the practitioner to control severe hypertension. This article reviews some of the current concepts and common misconceptions in the management of patients with acutely elevated BP. [References: 166]

Publication Type: Journal Article. Review.

Resident Report / Department of Medicine & Grady Branch Library

Emory University School of Medicine

2006 Edition

Participating Faculty:  Carlos Del Rio MD  / Joyce Doyle MD / Lorenzo Difrancesco MD / Joel Mermis MD / Maunank Shah MD

Contact: Karl Woodworth