p.1
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of
elevated blood pressure and hypertension
Developed by the task force on the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and endorsed by the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Authors/Task Force Members: John William McEvoy *†, (Chairperson) (Ireland), Cian P. McCarthy ‡, (Task Force Co-ordinator) (United States of America), Rosa Maria Bruno ‡, (Task Force Co-ordinator) (France), Sofie Brouwers (Belgium), Michelle D. Canavan (Ireland), Claudio Ceconi (Italy), Ruxandra Maria Christodorescu (Romania), Stella S. Daskalopoulou (Canada), Charles J. Ferro 1 (United Kingdom), Eva Gerdts (Norway), Henner Hanssen (Switzerland), Julie Harris (United Kingdom), Lucas Lauder (Switzerland/Germany), Richard J. McManus (United Kingdom), Gerard J. Molloy (Ireland), Kazem Rahimi (United Kingdom), Vera Regitz-Zagrosek (Germany), Gian Paolo Rossi 2 (Italy), Else Charlotte Sandset 3 (Norway), Bart Scheenaerts (Belgium), Jan A. Staessen (Belgium), Izabella Uchmanowicz (Poland), Maurizio Volterrani (Italy), Rhian M. Touyz *†, (Chairperson) (Canada), and ESC Scientific Document Group
* Corresponding authors: John William McEvoy, Department of Cardiology, University of Galway School of Medicine, Galway, Ireland, and National Institute for Prevention and Cardiovascular Health, Galway, Ireland. Tel: +353 91 544310, E-mail: johnwilliam.mcevoy@universityofgalway.ie; and Rhian M. Touyz, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, and the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Tel: +1 514 934 1934 ext 71608, E-mail: Rhian.touyz@mcgill.ca † The two Chairpersons contributed equally to the document and are joint corresponding authors. ‡ The two Task Force Co-ordinators contributed equally to the document. Author/Task Force Member affiliations are listed in author information. 1Representing the European Renal Association (ERA), 2Representing the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE), 3Representing the European Stroke Organisation (ESO), 4Representing the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EuGMS). ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee: listed in the Appendix. ESC subspecialty communities having participated in the development of this document: Associations: Association of Cardiovascular Nursing & Allied Professions (ACNAP), European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), Heart Failure Association (HFA). Councils: Council for Cardiology Practice, Council on Hypertension, Council on Stroke. Working Groups: Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases, Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, E-Cardiology. Patient Forum Disclaimer. The ESC Guidelines represent the views of the ESC and were produced after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at the time of their publication. The ESC is not responsible in the event of any contradiction, discrepancy and/or ambiguity between the ESC Guidelines and any other official recommendations or guidelines issued by the relevant public health authorities, in particular in relation to good use of healthcare or therapeutic strategies. Health professionals are encouraged to take the ESC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgment, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic medical strategies; however, the ESC Guidelines do not override, in any way whatsoever, the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient and, where appropriate and/or necessary, the patient’s caregiver. Nor do the ESC Guidelines exempt health professionals from taking into full and careful consideration the relevant official updated recommendations or guidelines issued by the competent public health authorities, in order to manage each patient’s case in light of the scientifically accepted data pursuant to their respective ethical and professional obligations. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the applicable rules and regulations relating to drugs and medical devices at the time of prescription. The ESC warns readers that the technical language may be misinterpreted and declines any responsibility in this respect. Permissions. The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only. No commercial use is authorized. No part of the ESC Guidelines may be translated or reproduced in any form without written permission from the ESC. Permissions can be obtained upon submission of a written request to Oxford University Press, the publisher of the European Heart Journal and the party authorized to handle such permissions on behalf of the ESC (journals.permissions@oup.com). © The European Society of Cardiology 2024. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, used for text and data mining, or used for training artificial intelligence, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. ESC Guidelines are protected by copyright. As per opt out option under Article 4 §3 of EU Directive 2019/790, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) reserves all rights to license uses of ESC Guidelines to train or develop generative artificial intelligence (AI) models, large language models or other deep learning or machine learning models.
European Heart Journal (2024) 45, 3912–4018 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae178
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.2
Document Reviewers: Ana Abreu, (CPG Review Co-ordinator) (Portugal), Michael Hecht Olsen, (CPG Review Co-ordinator) (Denmark), Marco Ambrosetti (Italy), Emmanuel Androulakis (United Kingdom), Lia Evi Bang (Denmark), Jesper Nørgaard Bech (Denmark), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Pierre Boutouyrie (France), Luís Bronze (Portugal), Sergio Buccheri (Sweden), Regina Dalmau (Spain), Maria Carmen De Pablo Zarzosa (Spain), Christian Delles (United Kingdom), Maria Manuela Fiuza (Portugal), Rahima Gabulova (Azerbaijan), Bjørn Olav Haugen (Norway), Christian Heiss (United Kingdom), Borja Ibanez (Spain), Stefan James (Sweden), Vikas Kapil (United Kingdom), Meral Kayikçioglu (Turkey), Lars Køber (Denmark), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), Emanuela Teresa Locati (Italy), Sharon MacDonald (United Kingdom), Anastasia S. Mihailidou (Australia), Borislava Mihaylova (United Kingdom), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom), Martin Bodtker Mortensen (Denmark), Sandor Nardai (Hungary), Lis Neubeck (United Kingdom), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Peter M. Nilsson (Sweden), Agnes A. Pasquet (Belgium), Mónica Mendes Pedro (Portugal), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Ernst Rietzschel (Belgium), Bianca Rocca (Italy), Xavier Rossello (Spain), Jean-Paul Schmid (Switzerland), Eduard Shantsila (United Kingdom), Isabella Sudano (Switzerland), Ana Teresa Timóteo (Portugal), Georgios Tsivgoulis3 (Greece), Andrea Ungar4 (Italy), Ilonca Vaartjes (Netherlands), Frank Visseren (Netherlands), Heinz Voeller (Germany), Christiaan Vrints (Belgium), Adam Witkowski (Poland), Maria-Christina Zennaro2 (France), and Katja Zeppenfeld (Netherlands)
All experts involved in the development of these guidelines have submitted declarations of interest, which are reported in a supplementary document to the guidelines. See the European Heart Journal online or www.escardio.org/Guidelines for supplementary documents, as well as evidence tables.
Click here to access the corresponding ESC CardioMed chapters.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Keywords Guidelines • Blood pressure • Hypertension • Hypertension-mediated organ damage • Blood pressure measurement • Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring • Home blood pressure monitoring • Antihypertensive medication • Hypertension treatment • Hypertension targets • Secondary hypertension • Cardiovascular disease risk estimation • Cardiovascular disease prevention • Resistant hypertension • Hypertension screening
Table of contents
1. Preamble .............................................................................................................. 3918 2. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 3919 2.1. What is new ............................................................................................. 3920 3. Pathophysiology of elevated blood pressure and hypertension .. 3928 4. Clinical consequences of elevated blood pressure and hypertension ................................................................................................... 3928 5. Measuring blood pressure ............................................................................ 3929 5.1. Introduction and pertinent definitions .......................................... 3929 5.2. Practical recommendations for measuring blood pressure . 3930 5.2.1. Clinical validation of equipment for measuring blood pressure .......................................................................................................... 3930 5.2.2. Office blood pressure measurement ..................................... 3930 5.2.3. Home blood pressure measurement ..................................... 3931 5.2.4. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement ......................... 3933 5.2.5. Comparison of home and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring ...................................................................................................... 3934 5.3. What is the best method for measuring blood pressure to diagnose hypertension? ................................................................................ 3934 5.3.1. Blood pressure measurement for hypertension screening ......................................................................................................... 3934 5.3.2. Blood pressure measurement for diagnosing hypertension ................................................................................................. 3934 5.4. What is the best method for measuring blood pressure for long-term management of hypertension? ............................................ 3934 5.4.1. Home monitoring ........................................................................... 3934 5.4.2. Ambulatory monitoring ............................................................... 3934 5.5. Measuring blood pressure in selected groups ........................... 3935 5.5.1. Pregnancy ........................................................................................... 3935 5.5.2. Atrial fibrillation ............................................................................... 3935 5.5.3. Orthostatic hypotension ............................................................. 3935 5.6. Novel methods of measuring blood pressure ........................... 3935 6. Definition and classification of elevated blood pressure and hypertension, and cardiovascular disease risk assessment .................. 3936
6.1. Definition and classification of elevated blood pressure and hypertension ..................................................................................................... 3936 6.2. Principles of a risk-based approach for managing blood pressure and preventing cardiovascular disease ................................ 3936 6.2.1. Role of cardiovascular disease risk assessment ................. 3936 6.3. Predicting cardiovascular disease risk ............................................ 3937 6.3.1. 10-year cardiovascular disease risk-prediction models .. 3938 6.4. Refining cardiovascular disease risk estimation beyond risk models ................................................................................................................. 3939
ESC Guidelines 3913
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.3
6.4.1. Sex-specific non-traditional cardiovascular disease risk modifiers ......................................................................................................... 3939 6.4.2. Non-traditional cardiovascular disease risk modifiers shared by men and women .................................................................... 3940 6.4.3. Additional risk decision tests ..................................................... 3941 6.5. Summary of the cardiovascular disease risk stratification approach for allocating blood pressure treatment .......................... 3941 7. Diagnosing hypertension and investigating underlying causes ...... 3943 7.1. Screening for hypertension ................................................................ 3943 7.2. Confirming the diagnosis of hypertension .................................. 3943 7.3. Communicating the diagnosis ........................................................... 3944 7.4. Baseline assessment and diagnostic approach ........................... 3944 7.4.1. Medical history, medication history, and physical examination ................................................................................................... 3944 7.4.2. Drug adherence and persistence with treatment ............ 3945 7.4.3. Routine and optional tests .......................................................... 3945 7.4.3.1. The kidneys ............................................................................... 3947 7.4.3.2. The heart ................................................................................... 3947 7.4.3.3. The arteries .............................................................................. 3948 7.4.4. Genetic testing ................................................................................. 3948 7.5. Resistant hypertension: definition and diagnosis ...................... 3948 7.6. Secondary hypertension: when to screen/further investigations ..................................................................................................... 3950 7.6.1. General considerations ................................................................ 3950 7.6.2. Primary aldosteronism ................................................................. 3950 7.6.3. Renovascular hypertension ........................................................ 3951 7.6.4. Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome ..................................... 3951 7.6.5. Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma ..................................... 3954 8. Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure and hypertension ........................................................................................................... 3954
8.1. Prevention strategies in early life ..................................................... 3954 8.2. Non-pharmacological interventions ............................................... 3954 8.2.1. Dietary sodium and potassium intake ................................... 3954 8.2.1.1. Sodium ........................................................................................ 3954 8.2.1.2. Potassium ................................................................................... 3955 8.2.2. Physical activity and exercise ..................................................... 3956 8.2.3. Weight reduction and diet ......................................................... 3957 8.2.4. Alcohol, coffee, and soft drinks ................................................ 3957 8.2.5. Smoking ............................................................................................... 3957 8.3. Pharmacological interventions .......................................................... 3958 8.3.1. Treatment strategy to reduce adverse cardiovascular disease outcomes ........................................................................................ 3958 8.3.2. Drug classes with evidence on clinical outcomes in the target population ......................................................................................... 3958 8.3.3. New therapies with blood pressure-lowering properties that await supportive evidence from cardiovascular outcomes trials prior to guideline endorsement and routine use in hypertension ................................................................................................. 3959 8.3.4. Drug combinations and up-titrating strategies .................. 3959 8.3.5. A practical algorithm for intensive, effective, and tolerable blood pressure lowering with drug therapy, including considerations around single-pill combinations ............................. 3959 8.3.6. Timing of blood pressure-lowering drug treatment ....... 3962 8.4. Selecting patients for pharmacological blood pressurelowering treatment ........................................................................................ 3962 8.5. Intensity of blood pressure-lowering therapy and ideal treatment targets ............................................................................................ 3964 8.5.1. Expected degree of blood pressure reduction with approved drugs ............................................................................................ 3964 8.5.2. The ideal target of blood pressure-lowering treatment 3964 8.5.3. Personalizing treatment strategies .......................................... 3965 8.5.4. Duration and monitoring of drug therapy ........................... 3966 8.6. Device-based blood pressure lowering ........................................ 3966 8.6.1. Catheter-based renal denervation .......................................... 3966 8.6.2. Other devices ................................................................................... 3968 8.7. Unintended and potentially harmful consequences of blood pressure lowering and implications for treatment targets ........... 3968 8.7.1. Adverse effects of blood pressure-lowering medications 3968 8.7.1.1. Symptomatic adverse effects ............................................ 3968 8.7.1.2. Renal effects ............................................................................. 3968 8.7.1.3. Erectile dysfunction ............................................................... 3968 8.7.2. Pill burden and non-adherence ................................................. 3968 8.7.3. Potentially harmful consequences of blood pressure lowering for frail older people .............................................................. 3968 8.7.4. Clinical inertia in blood pressure lowering .......................... 3968 9. Managing specific patient groups or circumstances .......................... 3969 9.1. Young adulthood (18–40 years) ...................................................... 3969 9.1.1. Definition and epidemiology ...................................................... 3969 9.1.2. Secondary hypertension in young adulthood ..................... 3969 9.1.3. Measurement and management of blood pressure in young adults .................................................................................................. 3969 9.2. Pregnancy ................................................................................................... 3969 9.2.1. Definition and epidemiology ...................................................... 3969 9.2.2. Classifying hypertension in pregnancy ................................... 3969 9.2.3. Measuring blood pressure in pregnancy ............................... 3970 9.2.4. Investigating hypertension in pregnancy ............................... 3970 9.2.5. Preventing hypertension and pre-eclampsia ....................... 3970 9.2.6. Treatment initiation and blood pressure targets .............. 3970 9.2.7. Managing mild hypertension in pregnancy (office blood pressure 140–159/90–109 mmHg) ..................................................... 3970 9.2.8. Managing severe hypertension in pregnancy (>160/110 mmHg) ............................................................................................................. 3971 9.2.9. Managing blood pressure post-partum ................................. 3971 9.2.10. Risk of recurrence of hypertensive disorders in a subsequent pregnancy .............................................................................. 3971 9.3. Very old age (≥85 years), frailty, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy .................................................................................................... 3971 9.3.1. Definition of frailty ......................................................................... 3971 9.3.2. Randomized controlled trials of blood pressure lowering in frail older patients .................................................................................. 3972 9.3.3. Starting blood pressure-lowering treatment in very old or frail patients ................................................................................................... 3973 9.3.4. Maintaining blood pressure lowering in very old or frail patients ............................................................................................................ 3973 9.4. Isolated systolic and diastolic hypertension ................................ 3973 9.4.1. Definition of isolated systolic hypertension ........................ 3973 9.4.2. Isolated systolic hypertension, risk factors, and ageing .. 3973 9.4.3. Isolated systolic hypertension in young adults ................... 3974 9.4.4. Isolated diastolic hypertension .................................................. 3974 9.5. Orthostatic hypotension with supine hypertension ............... 3974 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.4
9.6. Diabetes ..................................................................................................... 3975 9.6.1. Diabetes and elevated blood pressure/hypertension ..... 3975 9.6.2. J-shaped curve of blood pressure and risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes ........................... 3975 9.6.3. Managing blood pressure in diabetes ..................................... 3975 9.7. Chronic kidney disease ........................................................................ 3975 9.7.1. Relationship between hypertension and chronic kidney disease .............................................................................................................. 3975 9.7.2. Blood pressure lowering in chronic kidney disease ......... 3976 9.7.3. Managing blood pressure in chronic kidney disease ........ 3976 9.7.4. Blood pressure targets in chronic kidney disease ............ 3976 9.8. Cardiac disease ........................................................................................ 3976 9.8.1. Blood pressure thresholds and targets in patients with cardiac disease .............................................................................................. 3976 9.8.2. Coronary artery disease with particular reference to the blood pressure J-curve ............................................................................. 3977 9.8.3. Valvular heart disease ................................................................... 3977 9.8.4. Heart failure ...................................................................................... 3977 9.8.5. Heart rhythm disease (including AF) ...................................... 3978 9.9. Chronic cerebrovascular disease and/or cognitive impairment ...................................................................... 3978 9.9.1. Role of hypertension in chronic cerebrovascular disease 3978 9.9.2. Treatment in patients with history of prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack ....................................................................... 3978 9.9.3. Treatment in patients with chronic cerebrovascular disease and cognitive impairment ........................................................ 3978 9.10. Aortopathy ............................................................................................. 3979 9.10.1. Coarctation of the aorta ........................................................... 3979 9.10.2. Bicuspid aortic valve-related aortopathy ........................... 3979 9.10.3. Preventing aortic dilation and dissection in high-risk patients ............................................................................................................ 3979 9.11. Different ethnic groups ..................................................................... 3979 9.12. Nocturnal hypertension .................................................................... 3979 9.12.1. Definition ......................................................................................... 3979 9.12.2. Epidemiology .................................................................................. 3980 9.12.3. Night-time blood pressure as a cardiovascular disease risk factor ....................................................................................................... 3980 9.12.4. Treatment of nocturnal hypertension ................................ 3980 9.13. Resistant hypertension ...................................................................... 3980 9.13.1. Definition of resistant hypertension .................................... 3980 9.13.2. Non-pharmacological interventions ..................................... 3980 9.13.3. Pharmacological interventions ................................................ 3980 9.13.4. Devices for blood pressure lowering .................................. 3981 9.14. Management of specific causes of secondary hypertension 3982 9.14.1. General considerations .............................................................. 3982 9.14.2. Primary aldosteronism ............................................................... 3982 9.14.3. Renovascular hypertension ...................................................... 3982 9.14.4. Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma .................................. 3983 9.14.5. Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome ................................... 3983 9.14.6. Drug-induced hypertension ..................................................... 3983 9.14.6.1. Anticancer drug-induced hypertension ...................... 3983 9.14.7. Other forms of secondary hypertension ........................... 3983 10. Acute and short-term lowering of blood pressure ........................ 3983 10.1. Acute blood pressure management in hypertensive emergencies ....................................................................................................... 3983 10.1.1. Definition and characteristics of hypertensive emergencies ................................................................................................... 3983 10.1.2. Acute management of hypertensive emergencies ......... 3984 10.1.3. Prognosis and follow-up ........................................................... 3984 10.2. Acute blood pressure management in acute intracerebral haemorrhage ..................................................................................................... 3984 10.3. Acute blood pressure management in acute ischaemic stroke ................................................................................................................... 3984 10.4. Acute blood pressure management in pre-eclampsia and severe hypertension in pregnancy ........................................................... 3985 10.4.1. Pre-eclampsia ................................................................................. 3985 10.4.2. Severe acute hypertension in pregnancy ........................... 3985 10.5. Peri-operative acute management of elevated blood pressure .............................................................................................................. 3985 10.5.1. Blood pressure-lowering drugs in the peri-operative phase ................................................................................................................ 3985 11. Patient-centred care in hypertension ................................................... 3986 11.1. Definition ................................................................................................ 3986 11.2. Communicating consequences of treatment .......................... 3986 11.3. Self-measuring and monitoring ...................................................... 3987 11.4. Facilitating medication adherence and persistence ............... 3987 11.5. Multidisciplinary management ........................................................ 3987 12. Key messages .................................................................................................. 3988 13. Gaps in the evidence ................................................................................... 3989 14. ‘What to do’ and ‘what not to do’ messages from the guidelines 3989 15. Evidence tables ............................................................................................... 3993 16. Data availability statement ......................................................................... 3993 17. Author information ...................................................................................... 3993 18. Appendix ........................................................................................................... 3993 19. References ........................................................................................................ 3994
Tables of Recommendations
Recommendation Table 1 — Recommendations for measuring blood pressure (see Evidence Tables 1–8) ................................................ 3935 Recommendation Table 2 — Recommendations for categorizing blood pressure (see Evidence Table 9) ....................................................... 3936 Recommendation Table 3 — Recommendations for assessing cardiovascular disease risk among individuals with elevated blood pressure (office systolic blood pressure 120–139 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure 70–89 mmHg) (see Evidence Tables 10 and 11) .... 3939 Recommendation Table 4 — Recommendations for refining cardiovascular disease risk (see Evidence Tables 12–14) .................... 3941 Recommendation Table 5 — Recommendations for blood pressure screening (see Evidence Table 15) ................................................................ 3943 Recommendation Table 6 — Recommendations for confirming hypertension diagnosis ........................................................................................ 3943 Recommendation Table 7 — Recommendations for assessing adherence and persistence with treatment (see Evidence Table 16) 3945 Recommendation Table 8 — Recommendations for assessing renal hypertension-mediated organ damage ........................................................ 3947 Recommendation Table 9 — Recommendations for assessing cardiac hypertension-mediated organ damage ........................................ 3947 Recommendation Table 10 — Recommendations for assessing vascular hypertension-mediated organ damage (see Evidence Table 17) ................................................................................................................... 3948 Recommendation Table 11 — Recommendations for genetic testing in hypertension management .......................................................................... 3948 Recommendation Table 12 — Recommendations for resistant hypertension work-up (see Evidence Table 18) ...................................... 3950
ESC Guidelines 3915
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.5
Recommendation Table 13 — Recommendations for screening for secondary hypertension (see Evidence Tables 19 and 20) ................. 3954 Recommendation Table 14 — Recommendations for screening for hypertension in children and adolescents (see Evidence Table 21) 3954 Recommendation Table 15 — Recommendations for non-pharmacological treatment of blood pressure and cardiovascular risk reduction (see Evidence Tables 22–26) ................................................. 3958 Recommendation Table 16 — Recommendations for pharmacological treatment of hypertension (see Evidence Tables 27, 28, and 29) ............................................................................................................... 3962 Recommendation Table 17 — Recommendations for initiating blood pressure-lowering treatment (see Evidence Tables 30–32) . 3963 Recommendation Table 18 — Recommendations for blood pressure targets with treatment (see Evidence Table 34) .................. 3966 Recommendation Table 19 — Recommendations for follow-up in patients with treated hypertension (see Evidence Table 33) ............ 3966 Recommendation Table 20 — Recommendations for device-based treatment of hypertension (see Evidence Table 35) ............................. 3967 Recommendation Table 21 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in young adults (see Evidence Tables 36 and 37) ....... 3969 Recommendation Table 22 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in pregnancy (see Evidence Tables 38–40) ................... 3971 Recommendation Table 23 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients who are very old or frail (see Evidence Table 41) ................................................................................................................... 3973 Recommendation Table 24 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with orthostatic hypotension ....................... 3975 Recommendation Table 25 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with diabetes ........................................................ 3975 Recommendation Table 26 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with chronic kidney disease ........................... 3976 Recommendation Table 27 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with cardiac disease .......................................... 3978 Recommendation Table 28 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with chronic cerebrovascular disease and cognitive impairment ........................................................................................... 3979 Recommendation Table 29 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in different ethnic groups ...................................................... 3979 Recommendation Table 30 — Recommendations for treating resistant hypertension (see Evidence Tables 42 and 43) .................... 3981 Recommendation Table 31 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with renovascular hypertension (see Evidence Tables 44 and 45) .............................................................................. 3982 Recommendation Table 32 — Recommendations for acutely managing blood pressure in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage or acute ischaemic stroke ................................................................................. 3984 Recommendation Table 33 — Recommendations for acutely managing blood pressure in patients with severe hypertension in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia (see Evidence Table 46) ........................ 3985 Recommendation Table 34 — Recommendations for communicating consequences of treatment (see Evidence Table 47) ................................................................................................................... 3987 Recommendation Table 35 — Recommendations for self-measuring and monitoring blood pressure (see Evidence Table 48) ................... 3987 Recommendation Table 36 — Recommendations for multi/ interdisciplinary blood pressure management (see Evidence Table 49) ................................................................................................................... 3987 List of tables
Table 1 Classes of recommendations .......................................................... 3918 Table 2 Levels of evidence ................................................................................ 3919 Table 3 New recommendations .................................................................... 3920 Table 4 Revised recommendations ............................................................... 3923 Table 5 Comparison of office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure measurement thresholds for elevated blood pressure and hypertension ..................................................................................................................... 3933 Table 6 Comparison of ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring .................................................................................................................. 3934 Table 7 Key illness representations and treatment beliefs: how these apply to communicating a hypertension diagnosis to the patient (note that gender influences these representations) ............................ 3945 Table 8 Routine tests recommended in the initial work-up of a patient with elevated blood pressure or hypertension ........................ 3946 Table 9 Optional tests that may be used as clinically indicated in the initial work-up of a patient with elevated blood pressure or hypertension to assess hypertension-mediated organ damage or established cardiovascular disease ...................................................................................................... 3947 Table 10 Current definition of resistant hypertension ........................ 3950 Table 11 Conditions found to cause pseudo-resistance or resistance to blood pressure-lowering treatment ........................................................ 3950 Table 12 Drugs and conditions that affect aldosterone, renin, and aldosterone-to-renin ratio ................................................................................ 3951 Table 13 Optional tests that should be used to screen for secondary hypertension in the presence of suggestive signs, symptoms, or medical history ....................................................................................................... 3952 Table 14 Initiation of blood pressure-lowering treatment based on confirmed blood pressure category and cardiovascular disease risk 3963 Table 15 What to do and what not to do ................................................ 3989
List of figures
Figure 1 Pathophysiology of elevated blood pressure and hypertension ........................................................................................................... 3928 Figure 2 Persistently elevated blood pressure and hypertension lead to hypertension-mediated organ damage and cardiovascular disease ..... 3929 Figure 3 Summary of office blood pressure measurement ................ 3931 Figure 4 Summary of home blood pressure measurement ................ 3932 Figure 5 Summary of ambulatory blood pressure measurement .... 3933 Figure 6 Blood pressure categories .............................................................. 3937 Figure 7 Sufficiently high cardiovascular risk conditions that warrant blood pressure-lowering treatment among adults with elevated blood pressure ....................................................................................................... 3938 Figure 8 Cardiovascular disease risk modifiers to consider for up-classification of risk ........................................................................................ 3940 Figure 9 Summary of cardiovascular disease risk-stratification approach for blood pressure treatment in adults with elevated blood pressure ....................................................................................................... 3942 Figure 10 Protocol for confirming hypertension diagnosis ................. 3944 Figure 11 Definitions, assessments, and potential interventions for the three phases of adherence to BP-lowering medications ............. 3946 Figure 12 Tests and criteria for defining hypertension-mediated organ damage and considerations for their use in clinical practice 3949 Figure 13 Summary of primary aldosteronism as a common form of secondary hypertension ..................................................................................... 3952 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.6
Figure 14 Summary of renovascular disease as a common form of secondary hypertension ..................................................................................... 3953 Figure 15 Summary of obstructive sleep apnoea as a common form of secondary hypertension ............................................................................... 3953 Figure 16 Physical activity according to different types of exercise and reduction of blood pressure and overall cardiovascular disease risk ............................................................................................................................... 3955 Figure 17 Effects of main lifestyle factors on blood pressure and cardiovascular risk reduction ........................................................................... 3956 Figure 18 Practical algorithm for pharmacological blood pressure lowering .................................................................................................................... 3960 Figure 19 Central Illustration ........................................................................... 3961 Figure 20 Systolic blood pressure categories and treatment target range ........................................................................................................................... 3965 Figure 21 Frailty assessment in the management of blood pressure 3972 Figure 22 Management of resistant hypertension .................................. 3981 Figure 23 Patient-centred care ....................................................................... 3986 Figure 24 The five dimensions of adherence (WHO, 2003) applied to hypertension ..................................................................................................... 3988
Abbreviations and acronyms
ABI Ankle–brachial index ABPM Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring ACCORD Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ACE Angiotensin-converting enzyme ACR Albumin:creatinine ratio AF Atrial fibrillation AHI Apnoea–hypopnoea index ALARA As low as reasonably achievable ALLHAT Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack AOBP Automated office blood pressure (measurement) ARB Angiotensin receptor blocker ARNi Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor ARR Aldosterone-to-renin ratio ASCVD Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease BMI Body mass index BP Blood pressure BSA Body surface area CAC Coronary artery calcium CAD Coronary artery disease CCB Calcium channel blocker CHAP Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy CI Confidence interval CKD Chronic kidney disease CKD-EPI Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration COVID-19 Coronavirus disease 2019 CPAP Continuous positive airway pressure CPG Clinical Practice Guidelines CT Computed tomography CVD Cardiovascular disease DASH Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension DBP Diastolic blood pressure DECIDE-Salt Diet, ExerCIse and carDiovascular hEalth–Salt EACTS European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery ECG Electrocardiogram eGFR Estimated glomerular filtration rate EPIC European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition ESC European Society of Cardiology ESH European Society of Hypertension ESPRIT Effects of intensive Systolic blood Pressure lowering treatment in reducing RIsk of vascular evenTs FMD-RVH Fibromuscular dysplasia-induced renovascular hypertension GFR Glomerular filtration rate GLP-1 Glucagon-like peptide-1 GP General practitioner HbA1c Glycated haemoglobin HBPM Home blood pressure monitoring HDL High-density lipoprotein HFpEF Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction HF(m)rEF Heart failure with (mildly) reduced ejection fraction HIV Human immunodeficiency virus HMOD Hypertension-mediated organ damage i.m. Intramuscular i.v. Intravenous KDIGO Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes LA Left atrial LDL Low-density lipoprotein LV Left ventricular LVH Left ventricular hypertrophy MRA Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist MRI Magnetic resonance imaging NNT Number needed to treat NT-proBNP N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide OSAS Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome PPGL Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma PREOP-ACEI Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Preoperative Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition PREMs Patient-Reported Experience Measures PROMS Patient-Reported Outcome Measures PTRA Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty PWV Pulse wave velocity RAAS Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system RADIANCE-HTN A Study of the Recor Medical Paradise System in Clinical Hypertension RAS Renin–angiotensin system RCT Randomized controlled trial RVH Renovascular hypertension RWT Relative wall thickness SBP Systolic blood pressure SCORE2 Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2 SCORE2-OP Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons SGLT2 Sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 SNP Single-nucleotide polymorphism SNS Sympathetic nervous system SPC Single-pill combination SPRINT Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial SSaSS Salt Substitute and Stroke Study STEP Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in Elderly Hypertensive Patients STEP-1 Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity
ESC Guidelines 3917
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.7
TIA Transient ischaemic attack TRIUMPH Treating Resistant Hypertension Using Lifestyle Modification to Promote Health TSH Thyroid-stimulating hormone WHO World Health Organization WML White matter lesion
1 Preamble
Guidelines evaluate and summarize available evidence with the aim of assisting health professionals in proposing the best diagnostic or therapeutic approach for an individual patient with a given condition. Guidelines are intended for use by health professionals and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) makes its guidelines freely available. ESC Guidelines do not override the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient or the patient’s caregiver where appropriate and/or necessary. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the rules and regulations applicable in each country to drugs and devices at the time of prescription and to respect the ethical rules of their profession. ESC Guidelines represent the official position of the ESC on a given topic and are regularly updated when warranted by new evidence. ESC Policies and Procedures for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC website (https://www.escardio.org/Guidelines/Clinical- Practice-Guidelines/Guidelines-development/Writing-ESC-Guidelines). This guideline version updates and replaces the previous version from 2018. The Members of this task force were selected by the ESC to include professionals involved in the medical care of patients with this pathology, as well as patient representatives and methodologists. The selection procedure included an open call for authors and aimed to include members from across the whole of the ESC region and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities. Consideration was given to diversity and inclusion, notably with respect to gender and country of origin. The task force performed a critical review and evaluation of the published literature on diagnostic and therapeutic approaches including assessment of the risk-benefit ratio. The strength of every recommendation and the level of evidence supporting them were weighed and scored according to predefined scales as outlined in Tables 1 and 2 below. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) were also evaluated as the basis for recommendations and/or discussion in these guidelines. The task force followed ESC voting procedures and all approved recommendations were subject to a vote and achieved at least 75% agreement among voting members. Members of the task force with declared interests on specific topics were asked to abstain from voting on related recommendations.
The experts of the writing and reviewing panels provided declaration of interest forms for all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. Their declarations of interest were reviewed according to the ESC declaration of interest rules, which can be found on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/ guidelines) and have been compiled in a report published in a supplementary document with the guidelines. Funding for the development of ESC Guidelines is derived entirely from the ESC with no involvement of the healthcare industry.
Table 1 Classes of recommendations
©ESC 2024
Classes of recommendations Class I Evidence and/or general agreement that a given treatment or procedure is beneficial, useful, effective.
Conflicting evidence and/or a divergence of opinion about the usefulness/ efficacy of the given treatment or procedure.
Is recommended or is indicated
Wording to use Definition
Class III Evidence or general agreement that the given treatment or procedure is not useful/effective, and in some cases may be harmful. Is not recommended
Class IIb Usefulness/efficacy is less well established by evidence/opinion. May be considered
Class IIa Weight of evidence/opinion is in favour of usefulness/efficacy. Should be considered
Class II
© ESC 2024 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.8
The ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee supervises and co-ordinates the preparation of new guidelines and is responsible for the approval process. In addition to review by the CPG Committee, ESC Guidelines undergo multiple rounds of double-blind peer review by external experts, including members from across the whole of the ESC region, all National Cardiac Societies of the ESC and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities. After appropriate revisions, the guidelines are signed off by all the experts in the task force. The finalized document is signed off by the CPG Committee for publication in the European Heart Journal. ESC Guidelines are based on analyses of published evidence, chiefly on clinical trials and meta-analyses of trials, but potentially including other types of studies. Evidence tables summarizing key information from relevant studies are generated early in the guideline development process to facilitate the formulation of recommendations, to enhance comprehension of recommendations after publication, and reinforce transparency in the guidelines development process. The tables are published in their own section of ESC Guidelines and reference specific recommendation tables. Off-label use of medication may be presented in these guidelines if a sufficient level of evidence shows that it can be considered medically appropriate for a given condition. However, the final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible health professional giving special consideration to:
• The specific situation of the patient. Unless otherwise provided for by national regulations, off-label use of medication should be limited to situations where it is in the patient’s interest with regard to the quality, safety, and efficacy of care, and only after the patient has been informed and has provided consent; • Country-specific health regulations, indications by governmental drug regulatory agencies, and the ethical rules to which health professionals are subject, where applicable. 2 Introduction
This 2024 document updates the 2018 ESC/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension.1 While the current document builds on prior guidelines, it also incorporates important updates and new recommendations based on current evidence. For example:
(1) The title has changed from ‘Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension’ to ‘Guidelines on the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension’. This is based on evidence that the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) attributable to blood pressure (BP) is on a continuous exposure scale, not a binary scale of normotension vs. hypertension.2,3 Updated evidence also increasingly demonstrates the benefit on CVD outcomes of BP-lowering medications among persons with high CVD risk and BP levels that are elevated but that do not meet traditional thresholds used to define hypertension. The term ‘arterial’ is removed from the title of the 2024 Guidelines, as arterial hypertension can also occur in the pulmonary arteries, which is not a focus here. (2) The 2024 Guidelines continue to define hypertension as office systolic BP of ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP of ≥90 mmHg. However, a new BP category called ‘Elevated BP’ is introduced. Elevated BP is defined as an office systolic BP of 120–139 mmHg or diastolic BP of 70–89 mmHg. (3) A major, evidence-based change in the 2024 Guidelines is the rec-
ommendation to pursue a target systolic BP of 120–129 mmHg among adults receiving BP-lowering medications. There are several important caveats to this recommendation, including: (i) the requirement that treatment to this BP target is well tolerated by the patient, (ii) the fact that more lenient BP targets can be considered in persons with symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, those aged 85 years or over, or those with moderate-to-severe frailty
Table 2 Levels of evidence
Level of evidence A
Level of evidence B
Level of evidence C Data derived from multiple randomized clinical trials or meta-analyses.
Data derived from a single randomized clinical trial or large non-randomized studies.
Consensus of opinion of the experts and/or small studies, retrospective studies, registries. ©ESC 2024 © ESC 2024
ESC Guidelines 3919
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.9
or limited life expectancy, and (iii) a strong emphasis on out-of-office BP measurement to confirm the systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg is achieved. For those selected individual cases where a target systolic BP of 120–129 mmHg is not pursued, either due to intolerance or the existence of conditions that favour a more lenient BP target, we recommend targeting a BP that is as low as reasonably achievable. Personalized clinical decision-making and shared decisions with the patient are also emphasized. (4) Another important change in the 2024 Guidelines compared with earlier versions is the increased focus on evidence related to fatal and non-fatal CVD outcomes rather than surrogate outcomes such as BP lowering alone. Except for lifestyle interventions and low-risk non-pharmacological interventions aimed at implementation or care delivery, the current guidelines require that, for a Class I recommendation to be made for a drug or procedural intervention, the evidence must show benefit on CVD outcomes and not only BP lowering. (5) The task force comprised of a balanced representation of males and females. (6) The present guidelines consider sex and gender as an integral com-
ponent throughout the document, rather than in a separate section at the end. In this document, sex is the biological condition of being female or male from conception, based on genes, and gender is the socio-cultural dimension of being a woman or a man in a given society, based on gender roles, gender norms, gender identity, and gender relations valid in the respective society at a given timepoint.4,5 (7) The 2024 Guidelines are written to make them more ‘user friendly’.
Input from general practitioners (GPs) was obtained in this regard, and one task force member is a GP. Given the ageing population in Europe, there was also a focus on tailoring treatment with respect to frailty and into older age, which is addressed in multiple sections. Moreover, patient input and their lived experiences are considered throughout. We also now include evidence tables in the Supplementary section to provide improved transparency regarding our recommendations. As appropriate, readers who wish to seek additional details and information are referred to the Supplementary data online and to the
ESC CardioMed.6
(8) The task force recognized that a major challenge in guideline usage
is poor implementation. This likely contributes to suboptimal control of hypertension.7–9 To address this, a dedicated section on implementation is included in the Supplementary data online. Moreover, through a new initiative, we include information from national societies following a survey on guideline implementation completed during the national society peer review of the guidelines document. It is hoped this information may help inform national societies about potential barriers to implementation.
2.1 What is new
These 2024 Guidelines contain a number of new and revised recommendations, which are summarized in Tables 3 and 4, respectively.
Table 3 New recommendations
Recommendations Classa Levelb
5 Measuring blood pressure
It is recommended to measure BP using a validated and calibrated device, to enforce the correct measurement technique, and to apply a consistent approach to BP measurement for each patient. I B Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended for diagnostic purposes, particularly because it can detect both white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. Where out-of-office measurements are not logistically and/or economically feasible, then it is recommended that the diagnosis be confirmed with a repeat office BP measurement using the correct standardized measurement technique. I B Most automated oscillometric monitors have not been validated for BP measurement in AF; BP measurement should be considered using a manual auscultatory method in these circumstances, where possible. IIa C An assessment for orthostatic hypotension (≥20 systolic BP and/or ≥10 diastolic BP mmHg drop at 1 and/or 3 min after standing) should be considered at least at the initial diagnosis of elevated BP or hypertension and thereafter if suggestive symptoms arise. This should be performed after the patient is first lying or sitting for 5 min. IIa C 6. Definition and classification of elevated blood pressure and hypertension, and cardiovascular disease risk assessment It is recommended to use a risk-based approach in the treatment of elevated BP, and individuals with moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia are considered at increased risk for CVD events. I B It is recommended that, irrespective of age, individuals with elevated BP and a SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP CVD risk of ≥10% be considered at increased risk for CVD for the purposes of risk-based management of their elevated BP. I B SCORE2-Diabetes should be considered to estimate CVD risk among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with elevated BP, particularly if they are <60 years of age. IIa B History of pregnancy complications (gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, pre-term delivery, pre-eclampsia, one or more stillbirths, and recurrent miscarriage) are sex-specific risk modifiers that should be considered to up-classify individuals with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk). IIa B High-risk ethnicity (e.g. South Asian), family history of premature onset atherosclerotic CVD, socio-economic deprivation, auto-immune inflammatory disorders, HIV, and severe mental illness are risk modifiers shared by both sexes that should be considered to up-classify individuals with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk). IIa B After assessing 10-year predicted CVD risk and non-traditional CVD risk modifiers, if a risk-based BP-lowering treatment decision remains uncertain for individuals with elevated BP, measuring CAC score, carotid or femoral plaque using ultrasound, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or B-type natriuretic peptide biomarkers, or arterial stiffness using pulse wave velocity, may be considered to improve risk stratification among patients with borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk) after shared decision-making and considering costs. IIb B
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.10
7 Diagnosing hypertension and investigating underlying causes
Opportunistic screening for elevated BP and hypertension should be considered: • At least every 3 years for adults aged <40 years. • At least annually for adults aged ≥40 years. IIa C In individuals with elevated BP who do not currently meet risk thresholds for BP-lowering treatment, a repeat BP measurement and risk assessment within 1 year should be considered. IIa C Other forms of screening for hypertension (i.e. systematic screening, self-screening, and non-physician screening) may be considered, depending on their feasibility in different countries and healthcare systems. IIb B In individuals with increased CVD risk where their screening office BP is 120–139/70–89 mmHg, it is recommended to measure BP out of office, using ABPM and/or HBPM or, if not logistically feasible, make repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit. I B Objective evaluation of adherence (either directly observed treatment or detecting prescribed drugs in blood or urine samples) should be considered in the clinical work-up of patients with apparent resistant hypertension, if resources allow. IIa B If moderate-to-severe CKD is diagnosed, it is recommended to repeat measurements of serum creatinine, eGFR, and urine ACR at least annually. I C Coronary artery calcium scoring may be considered in patients with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management. IIb B Patients with resistant hypertension should be considered for referral to clinical centres with expertise in hypertension management for further testing. IIa B It is recommended that patients with hypertension presenting with suggestive signs, symptoms, or medical history of secondary hypertension are appropriately screened for secondary hypertension. I B Screening for primary aldosteronism by renin and aldosterone measurements should be considered in all adults with confirmed hypertension (BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg). IIa B
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure
Opportunistic screening with office BP measurements to monitor development of BP during late childhood and adolescence, especially if one or both parents have hypertension, should be considered to better predict development of adult hypertension and associated CVD risk. IIa B It is recommended to restrict free sugar consumption, in particular sugar-sweetened beverages, to a maximum of 10% of energy intake. It is also recommended to discourage consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, such as soft drinks and fruit juices, starting at young age. I B In patients with hypertension without moderate-to-advanced CKD and with high daily sodium intake, an increase of potassium intake by 0.5–1.0 g/day—for example through sodium substitution with potassium-enriched salt (comprising 75% sodium chloride and 25% potassium chloride) or through diets rich in fruits and vegetables—should be considered. IIa A In patients with CKD or taking potassium-sparing medication, such as some diuretics, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or spironolactone, monitoring serum levels of potassium should be considered if dietary potassium is being increased. IIa C It is recommended to take medications at the most convenient time of day for the patient, to establish a habitual pattern of medication taking to improve adherence. I B In adults with elevated BP and low/medium CVD risk (<10% over 10 years), BP lowering with lifestyle measures is recommended and can reduce the risk of CVD. I B In adults with elevated BP and sufficiently high CVD risk, after 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk. I A It is recommended that in hypertensive patients with confirmed BP ≥140/90 mmHg, irrespective of CVD risk, lifestyle measures and pharmacological BP-lowering treatment is initiated promptly to reduce CVD risk. I A It is recommended to maintain BP-lowering drug treatment lifelong, even beyond the age of 85 years, if well tolerated. I A Because the benefit in reducing CVD outcomes is uncertain in these settings, and noting that close monitoring of treatment tolerance is advised, BP-lowering treatment should only be considered from ≥140/90 mmHg (office) among persons meeting the following criteria: • pre-treatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension; • age ≥85 years; • clinically significant moderate-to-severe frailty; • and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years). IIa B In cases where BP-lowering treatment is poorly tolerated and achieving a target systolic of 120–129 mmHg is not possible, it is recommended to target a systolic BP level that is ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA principle). I A Once BP is controlled and stable under BP-lowering therapy, at least a yearly follow-up for BP and other CVD risk factors should be considered. IIa C
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3921
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.11
9 Managing specific patient groups or circumstances
Young adults Comprehensive screening for the main causes of secondary hypertension is recommended in adults diagnosed with hypertension before the age of 40 years, except for obese young adults where it is recommended to start with an obstructive sleep apnoea evaluation. I B Since SCORE2 has not been validated for individuals <40 years, screening for HMOD may be considered in such young individuals with elevated BP without other increased CVD risk conditions to identify additional individuals for possible medical treatment. IIb B Hypertension in pregnancy In consultation with an obstetrician, low- to moderate-intensity exercise is recommended in all pregnant women without contraindications to reduce the risk of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia. I B HBPM and ABPM should be considered to exclude white-coat and masked hypertension, which are more common in pregnancy. IIa C Older and frail patients It is recommended that treatment of elevated BP and hypertension among older patients aged <85 years who are not moderately to severely frail follows the same guidelines as for younger people, provided BP-lowering treatment is well tolerated. I A When initiating BP-lowering treatment for patients aged ≥85 years, and/or with moderate-to-severe frailty (at any age), long-acting dihydropyridine CCBs or RAS inhibitors should be considered, followed, if necessary, by a low-dose diuretic if tolerated, but preferably not a beta-blocker (unless compelling indications exist) or an alpha-blocker. IIa B As the safety and efficacy of BP treatment is less certain in individuals with moderate or severe frailty, clinicians should consider screening older adults for frailty using validated clinical tests; frail patients’ health priorities and a shared-decision approach should be considered when deciding on BP treatments and targets. IIa C If BP drops with progressing frailty, deprescription of BP-lowering medications (and other drugs that can reduce BP, such as sedatives and prostate-specific alpha-blockers) may be considered. IIb C Hypertension and orthostatic hypotension Before starting or intensifying BP-lowering medication, it is recommended to test for orthostatic hypotension, by first having the patient sit or lie for 5 min and then measuring BP 1 and/or 3 min after standing. I B It is recommended to pursue non-pharmacological approaches as the first-line treatment of orthostatic hypotension among persons with supine hypertension. For such patients, it is also recommended to switch BP-lowering medications that worsen orthostatic hypotension to an alternative BP-lowering therapy and not to simply de-intensify therapy. I A Chronic kidney disease In hypertensive patients with CKD and eGFR >20 mL/min/1.73 m2, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve outcomes in the context of their modest BP-lowering properties. I A Other conditions BP-lowering drug treatment is recommended for people with pre-diabetes or obesity when confirmed office BP is ≥140/90 mmHg or when office BP is 130–139/80–89 mmHg and the patient is at predicted 10-year risk of CVD ≥10% or with high-risk conditions, despite a maximum of 3 months of lifestyle therapy. I A In patients with a history of aortic valve stenosis and/or regurgitation who require BP-lowering treatment, RAS blockers should be considered as part of that treatment. IIa C In patients with a history of moderate-to-severe mitral valve regurgitation who require BP-lowering treatment, RAS blockers should be considered as part of that treatment. IIa C Renovascular hypertension Renal artery angioplasty without stenting should be considered for patients with hypertension and haemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis due to fibromuscular dysplasia. IIa C Renal artery angioplasty and stenting may be considered in patients with haemodynamically significant, atherosclerotic, renal artery stenosis (stenosis of 70%–99%, or 50%–69% with post-stenotic dilatation and/or significant trans-stenotic pressure gradient) with: • Recurrent heart failure, unstable angina, or sudden-onset flash pulmonary oedema despite maximally tolerated medical therapy; • Resistant hypertension; • Hypertension with unexplained unilaterally small kidney or CKD; • Bilateral renal artery stenosis or unilateral renal artery stenosis in a solitary viable kidney. IIb C Renal artery angioplasty is not recommended in patients without confirmed haemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis. III A
10 Acute and short-term lowering of blood pressure
In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage presenting with systolic BP ≥220 mmHg, acute reduction in systolic BP >70 mmHg from initial levels within 1 h of commencing treatment is not recommended. III B
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.12
11 Patient-centred care in hypertension
An informed discussion about CVD risk and treatment benefits tailored to the needs of a patient is recommended as part of hypertension management. I C Motivational interviewing should be considered for patients with hypertension at hospitals and community health centres to assist patients in controlling their BP and to enhance treatment adherence. IIa B Physician–patient web communications are an effective tool that should be considered in primary care, including reporting on home BP readings. IIa C Home BP measurement for managing hypertension by using self-monitored BP is recommended to achieve better BP control. I B Self-measurement, when properly performed, is recommended due to positive effects on the acceptance of a diagnosis of hypertension, patient empowerment, and adherence to treatment. I C Enhanced self-monitoring of BP using a device paired with a connected smartphone application may be considered, though evidence to date suggests that this may be no more effective than standard self-monitoring. IIb B Multidisciplinary approaches in the management of patients with elevated BP and hypertension, including appropriate and safe task-shifting away from physicians are recommended to improve BP control. I A © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio (urine); AF, atrial fibrillation; ALARA, as low as reasonably achievable; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BP, blood pressure; CAC, coronary artery calcium; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; MRA, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons; SGLT2, sodium–glucose co-transporter 2. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Table 4 Revised recommendations
Recommendations in 2018 version Classa Levelb Recommendations in 2024 version Classa Levelb
6 Definition and classification of elevated blood pressure and hypertension
It is recommended that BP be classified as optimal, normal, high–normal, or grades 1–3 hypertension, according to office BP. I C It is recommended that BP be categorized as
non-elevated BP, elevated BP, and hypertension to aid treatment decisions. I B
CV risk assessment with the SCORE system is recommended for hypertensive patients who are not already at high or very high risk due to established CVD, renal disease, or diabetes, a markedly elevated single risk factor (e.g. cholesterol), or hypertensive LVH.
I B SCORE2 is recommended for assessing 10-year risk of
fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged 40–69 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia. I B SCORE2-OP is recommended for assessing the 10-year risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged ≥70 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia. I B
7 Diagnosing hypertension and investigating underlying causes
It is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be based on: • Repeated office BP measurements on more than one
visit, except when hypertension is severe (e.g. grade 3 and especially in high-risk patients). At each visit, three BP measurements should be recorded, 1–2 min apart, and additional measurements should be performed if the first two readings differ by >10 mmHg. The patient’s BP is the average of the last two BP readings. Or • Out-of-office BP measurement with ABPM and/or
HBPM, provided that these measurements are logistically and economically feasible. I C Where screening office BP is 140–159/90–99 mmHg, it is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should
be based on out-of-office BP measurement with ABPM and/or HBPM. If these measurements are not logistically or economically feasible, then diagnosis can be made on repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit. I B Where screening office BP is ≥160/100 mmHg: • It is recommended that BP 160–179/100–109 mmHg
be confirmed as soon as possible (e.g. within 1 month) preferably by either home or ambulatory BP measurements. • It is recommended when BP ≥180/110 mmHg that hypertensive emergency be excluded. I C
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3923
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.13
Echocardiography is recommended in hypertensive patients when there are ECG abnormalities or signs or symptoms of LV dysfunction. I B Echocardiography is recommended in patients with
hypertension and ECG abnormalities, or signs or symptoms of cardiac disease. I B
Echocardiography may be considered when the detection of LVH may influence treatment decisions. IIb B Echocardiography may be considered in patients with
elevated BP, particularly when it is likely to change patient management. IIb B
Ultrasound examination of the carotid arteries may be considered for the detection of asymptomatic atherosclerotic plaques or carotid stenosis in patients with documented vascular disease elsewhere. IIb B Ultrasound examination of the carotid or femoral arteries for detecting plaque may be considered in
patients with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management. IIb B
Measurement of PWV may be considered for measuring arterial stiffness. IIb B Measurement of PWV may be considered in patients
with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management. IIb B
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure
Regular aerobic exercise (e.g. at least 30 min of moderate dynamic exercise on 5–7 days/week) is recommended.
I A Moderate intensity aerobic exercise of ≥150 min/week
(≥30 min, 5–7 days/week) or alternatively 75 min of vigorous intensity aerobic exercise per week over 3 days are recommended and should be complemented with low- or moderate-intensity dynamic or isometric resistance training (2–3 times/week) to reduce BP and CVD risk. I A
Body-weight control is indicated to avoid obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2 or waist circumference >102 cm in men and >88 cm in women), as is aiming at healthy BMI (about 20–25 kg/m2) and waist circumference values (<94 cm in men and <80 cm in women) to reduce BP and CV risk. I A It is recommended to aim for a stable and healthy BMI
(20–25 kg/m2) and waist circumference values (<94 cm in men and <80 cm in women) to reduce BP and CVD risk. I A
Increased consumption of vegetables, fresh fruits, fish, nuts, and unsaturated fatty acids (olive oil); low consumption of red meat; and consumption of low-fat dairy products are recommended. I A Adopting a healthy and balanced diet, such as the
Mediterranean or DASH diets, is recommended to help reduce BP and CVD risk. I A
It is recommended to restrict alcohol consumption to: • Less than 14 units/week for men. • Less than 8 units/week for women. I A Men and women are recommended to drink less
alcohol than the upper limit, which is about 100 g/week of pure alcohol. How this translates into number of drinks depends on portion size (the standards of which differ per country), but most drinks contain 8–14 g of alcohol per drink. Preferably, it is recommended to avoid alcohol to achieve the best health outcomes. I B
Among all anti-hypertensive drugs, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, beta-blockers, CCBs, and diuretics (thiazides and thiazide-like drugs, such as chlorthalidone and indapamide) have demonstrated effective reduction of BP and CV events in RCTs, and thus are indicated as the basis of anti-hypertensive treatment strategies. I A Among all BP-lowering drugs, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, and diuretics (thiazides and
thiazide-like drugs such as chlorthalidone and indapamide) have demonstrated the most effective reduction of BP and CVD events, and are therefore recommended as first-line treatments to lower BP. I A
It is recommended that if BP is not controlled with a three-drug combination, treatment should be increased by the addition of spironolactone or, if not tolerated, other diuretics such as amiloride or higher doses of other diuretics, a beta-blocker, or an alpha-blocker. I B If BP is not controlled with a three-drug combination
and in whom spironolactone is not effective or tolerated, treatment with eplerenone instead of spironolactone, or the addition of a beta-blocker if not already indicated and, next, a centrally acting BP-lowering medication, an alpha-blocker, hydralazine, or a potassium-sparing diuretic should be considered. IIa B
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure (blood pressure targets)
It is recommended that the first objective of treatment should be to lower BP to <140/90 mmHg in all patients and, provided that the treatment is well tolerated, treated BP values should be targeted to 130/80 mmHg or lower in most patients. I A To reduce CVD risk, it is recommended that treated
systolic BP values in most adults be targeted to 120– 129 mmHg, provided the treatment is well tolerated. I A
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.14
A diastolic BP target of <80 mmHg should be considered for all hypertensive patients, independent of the level of risk and comorbidities. IIa B In cases where on-treatment systolic BP is at or below
target (120–129 mmHg) but diastolic BP is not at target (≥80 mmHg), intensifying BP-lowering treatment to achieve an on-treatment diastolic BP of 70–79 mmHg may be considered to reduce CVD risk. IIb C
In older patients (aged ≥65 years) receiving BP-lowering drugs: • It is recommended that systolic BP should be targeted to a BP range of 130–139 mmHg.
I A Because the CVD benefit of an on-treatment systolic BP
target of 120–129 mmHg may not generalize to the following specific settings, personalized and more lenient systolic BP targets (e.g. <140 mmHg): should be considered among patients meeting the following criteria: • pre-treatment, symptomatic, orthostatic hypotension; • and/or age ≥85 years. IIa C Because the CVD benefit of an on-treatment systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg may not generalize to the following specific settings, personalized and more lenient BP targets (e.g. <140/90 mmHg) may be considered among patients meeting the following criteria: • clinically significant, moderate to severe frailty at any age; • and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years). IIb C
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure (renal denervation)
Use of device-based therapies is not recommended for the routine treatment of hypertension, unless in the context of clinical studies and RCTs, until further evidence regarding their safety and efficacy becomes available.
III B To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may
be considered for resistant hypertension patients who have BP that is uncontrolled despite a three BP-lowering drug combination (including a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic), and who express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment. IIb B To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may be considered for patients with both increased CVD risk and uncontrolled hypertension on fewer than three drugs, if they express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment. IIb A Due to a lack of adequately powered outcomes trials demonstrating its safety and CVD benefits, renal denervation is not recommended as a first-line BP-lowering intervention for hypertension. III C Renal denervation is not recommended for treating hypertension in patients with moderately to severely impaired renal function (eGFR <40 mL/min/1.73 m2) or secondary causes of hypertension, until further evidence becomes available. III C
9.1 Managing specific patient groups or circumstances
Hypertension in pregnancy In women with gestational hypertension, pre-existing hypertension superimposed by gestational hypertension, or with hypertension and subclinical organ damage or symptoms, initiation of drug treatment is recommended when systolic BP is ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg. I C In women with gestational hypertension, starting drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed
systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg. I B
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3925
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.15
In all other cases, initiation of drug treatment is recommended when systolic BP is ≥150 mmHg or diastolic BP is ≥95 mmHg.
I C In pregnant women with chronic hypertension, starting
drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg. I B In women with chronic and gestational hypertension, it is recommended to lower BP below 140/90 mmHg but not below 80 mmHg for diastolic BP. I C
Systolic BP ≥170 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg in a pregnant woman is an emergency, and admission to hospital is recommended. I C Systolic BP ≥160 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg in
pregnancy can indicate an emergency, and immediate hospitalization should be considered. IIa C
Diabetes Antihypertensive drug treatment is recommended for people with diabetes when office BP is ≥140/90 mmHg.
I A In most adults with elevated BP and diabetes, after a
maximum of 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office BP ≥130/80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk. I A
In people with diabetes receiving BP-lowering drugs it is recommended: • To target SBP to 130 mmHg and <130 mmHg if tolerated, but not <120 mmHg. • In older people (aged ≥65 years aged), to target to an
SBP range of 130–139 mmHg. I A In persons with diabetes who are receiving BP-lowering
drugs, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120– 129 mmHg, if tolerated. I A
Chronic kidney disease In patients with diabetic or non-diabetic CKD, it is recommended that an office BP ≥140/90 mmHg be treated with lifestyle advice and BP-lowering medication. I A In patients with diabetic or non-diabetic moderate-to-severe CKD and confirmed BP ≥130/80
mmHg, lifestyle optimization and BP-lowering medication are recommended to reduce CVD risk, provided such treatment is well tolerated. I A
In patients with diabetic or non-diabetic CKD: In adults with moderate-to-severe CKD who are receiving BP-lowering drugs and who have eGFR >30
mL/min/1.73 m2, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120–129 mmHg, if tolerated. Individualized BP targets are recommended for those with lower eGFR or renal transplantation. I A
• It is recommended to lower systolic BP to a range of
130–139 mmHg. I A • Individualized treatment should be considered
according to its tolerability and impact on renal function and electrolytes. IIa C RAS blockers are more effective at reducing albuminuria than other antihypertensive agents, and are recommended as part of the treatment strategy in hypertensive patients in the presence of microalbuminuria or proteinuria. I A ACE inhibitors or ARBs are more effective at reducing albuminuria than other BP-lowering agents and should
be considered as part of the treatment strategy for patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria or proteinuria. IIa B
Heart failure In patients with HFrEF, it is recommended that BP-lowering treatment comprises an ACE inhibitor or ARB, a beta-blocker and diuretic and/or MRA if required. I A In patients with symptomatic HFrEF/HFmrEF, the following treatments with BP-lowering effects are
recommended to improve outcomes: ACE inhibitors (or ARBs if ACE inhibitors are not tolerated) or ARNi, beta-blocker, MRA, and SGLT2 inhibitors. I A
In patients with HFpEF, because no specific drug has proven its superiority, all major agents can be used.
I C In hypertensive patients with symptomatic HFpEF, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve
outcomes in the context of their modest BP-lowering properties. I A In patients with symptomatic HFpEF who have BP above target, ARBs and/or MRAs may be considered to reduce heart failure hospitalizations and reduce BP. IIb B
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.16
Stroke In all hypertensive patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA, an SBP target range of 120–130 mmHg should be considered. IIa B In patients with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg with a history of TIA or stroke a systolic BP target of 120–129
mmHg is recommended to reduce CVD outcomes, provided treatment is tolerated. I A
Different ethnic groups In black patients, initial antihypertensive treatment should include a diuretic or a CCB, either in combination or with a RAS blocker. I B In black patients from Sub-Saharan Africa who require
BP-lowering treatment, combination therapy including a CCB combined with either a thiazide diuretic or a RAS blocker should be considered. IIa B
Resistant hypertension Recommended treatment of resistant hypertension is: • Reinforcement of lifestyle measures, especially
sodium restriction. • Addition of low-dose spironolactone to existing treatment. • Or the addition of further diuretic therapy if
intolerant to spironolactone, with either eplerenone, amiloride, a higher dose thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, or a loop diuretic. • Or the addition of bisoprolol or doxazosin. I B In patients with resistant hypertension and uncontrolled BP despite use of first-line BP-lowering
therapies, the addition of spironolactone to existing treatment should be considered. IIa B In patients with resistant hypertension in whom spironolactone is not effective or tolerated, treatment with eplerenone instead of spironolactone, or the addition of a beta-blocker if not already indicated, and, next, a centrally acting BP-lowering medication, an alpha-blocker, or hydralazine, or a potassium-sparing diuretic should be considered. IIa B To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may be considered for resistant hypertension patients who have BP that is uncontrolled despite a three BP-lowering drug combination, and who express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment. IIb B
10 Acute and short-term management of blood pressure
In patients with acute intracerebral haemorrhage: In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage, immediate BP lowering (within 6 h of symptom onset) should be
considered to a systolic target 140–160 mmHg to prevent haematoma expansion and improve functional outcome. IIa A
• Immediate BP lowering is not recommended for
patients with systolic BP <220 mmHg. III A • In patients with systolic BP ≥220 mmHg, careful
acute BP lowering with i.v. therapy to <180 mmHg should be considered. IIa B In hypertensive patients with an acute cerebrovascular event, anti-hypertensive treatment is recommended: For patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA and an indication for blood pressure lowering, it is
recommended that BP lowering therapy be commenced before hospital discharge.
I B • Immediately for TIA. I A • After several days in ischaemic stroke. I A In severe hypertension, drug treatment with i.v. labetalol, oral methyldopa, or nifedipine is recommended. I C In severe hypertension in pregnancy, drug treatment
with i.v. labetalol, oral methyldopa, or oral nifedipine is recommended. Intravenous hydralazine is a second-line option. I C © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio (urine); ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; ARNi, angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DASH, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HF(m)rEF, heart failure with (mildly) reduced ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; i.v., intravenous; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy; MRA, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons; SGLT2, sodium–glucose co-transporter 2; TIA, transient ischaemic attack. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3927
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.17
3 Pathophysiology of elevated
blood pressure and hypertension
Persistently high BP in systemic arteries is the hallmark of hypertension, which is the most important modifiable risk factor for all-cause and CVD morbidity and mortality globally.2 Most patients with hypertension have essential or primary hypertension, where the exact cause remains unknown, while an estimated 10% have secondary hypertension, with an identifiable cause (notably some studies indicate that the prevalence of secondary hypertension may be substantially higher, with modern systematic screening).10 The pathophysiology of hypertension involves complex interactions between environmental and behavioural factors, genes, hormonal networks, and multiple organ systems (renal, cardiovascular, and central nervous system11) (Figure 1). In addition, vascular and immune mechanisms are involved.12 Dysregulation of these processes leads to hypertension, which if uncontrolled, can lead to hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD) and adverse CVD outcomes.
Details on the pathophysiological processes, molecular mechanisms, and environmental and psychosocial elements that underlie hypertension are provided in the Supplementary text (Supplementary data online).
4 Clinical consequences of
elevated blood pressure and hypertension
Longstanding hypertension causes organ damage and ultimately leads to cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and clinical renal disease, which are all major contributors to the global burden of chronic disease
Physical activity Sedentary behaviour Sleep quality/quantity Dietary patterns Sodium and potassium intake Obesity Alcohol consumption Drugs or substances that increase BP
Geopolitical status Noise pollution Air pollution Climate Salt sensitivity Pressure- natriuresis RAAS Renal ischaemia
RAAS Endothelin system Sex hormones
Endothelial dysfunction Small artery remodelling Large artery stiffness
Biological sex BP-associated SNPs Monogenic forms of hypertension Epigenetic and foetal programming
Stress Low socio-economic status Social deprivation Healthcare access Gender identity, roles and norms Gender-based violence Discrimination
B e h a vi o u ra l fa ct o rs
G e n et ic f a ct o rs
S o ci
o -e
c
o
n
o m ic a n d p sy c h o s o
ci
al
f
a
ct
o
rs
E
n
vi r o n m e n ta l fa ct o rs
H
o
r
m
o
n
a
l
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s R
e
n
a l m e c h a n i s
m
s
N e u r a l m e c h a n i s m s
V
a
s
c
u l a r m e c h a n
i
s
m
s Autonomic nervous system (SNS/PNS) Baroreceptor reflex
Figure 1 Pathophysiology of elevated blood pressure and hypertension. BP, blood pressure; PNS, parasympathetic nervous system; RAAS, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism; SNS, sympathetic nervous system. Complex interplay between genes, environmental, and behavioural factors, organs, physiological systems, and neurohumoral processes contribute to BP regulation. Dysfunction of these processes leads to hypertension. The contribution of these factors to elevated BP and hypertension may differ among males and females. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.18
(Figure 2).2,13–22 Organs adversely affected by elevated BP and hypertension include the heart, brain, kidneys, eyes, and vessels (macrocirculation and microcirculation in organs with low resistance, such as the brain or kidney23), which undergo structural and functional changes. Although factors besides BP can contribute to these changes (i.e. dyslipidaemia, hyperglycaemia), we use the term ‘hypertensionmediated organ damage’ to indicate the presence of subclinical complications of hypertension that indicate high risk for subsequent clinical events. HMOD may have different profiles in men and women; for instance, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and left atrial dilatation are more frequent in women.24–28 Evidence of HMOD usually indicates long-standing elevated BP and/ or hypertension and confers incremental prognostic information regarding CVD risk in all BP categories.29–31 Unless treated, HMOD can progress from asymptomatic to symptomatic, ultimately resulting in overt CVD events.31 The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying HMOD in the heart, brain, kidneys, vessels, and eyes are detailed in the Supplementary text (Supplementary data online). The clinical consequences of HMOD, especially cerebrovascular disease (stroke and cognitive decline), kidney disease (acute and chronic), and heart disease [heart failure, atrial fibrillation (AF), ischaemic heart disease, and valvular disease] are also discussed in the Supplementary text (Supplementary data online). In addition, the Supplement highlights the impact of different measures of BP on CVD risk, including systolic BP, diastolic BP, pulse pressure, and BP variability.22,32–36 5 Measuring blood pressure
5.1 Introduction and pertinent definitions
This section reviews practical aspects of BP measurement, including technique and clinical validation of devices. It also reviews the evidence for the most appropriate BP measurement methods when screening populations for hypertension, diagnosing hypertension, and managing patients receiving BP-lowering interventions. The current guidelines promote use of out-of-office measurement for diagnosis and ongoing management of hypertension, reflecting increasing evidence for the stronger relationship of home and ambulatory monitoring with outcomes, the ability to detect white-coat and masked hypertension, new BP treatment targets as low as 120–129 mmHg systolic (Table 5), and evidence supporting enabling patient involvement and shared decision-making. Definitions: Systolic BP: arterial BP during systole (maximum arterial pulsatile pressure). This is measured using an auscultatory device at the onset of the first Korotkoff sound. Oscillometric devices estimate systole using an algorithm that imputes from mean arterial pressure.37 Diastolic BP: arterial BP during diastole (minimum arterial pulsatile pressure). This is measured using an auscultatory device at the time of complete disappearance of the Korotkoff sounds (fifth sound). If there is no disappearance of sounds (no fifth sound) then the fourth
See footnote for information on sex-differences White matter lesions Silent microinfarcts Microbleeds Brain atrophy Cognitive impairment Vascular dementia Ischaemic stroke Cerebral haemorrhage
Brain
Microvascular remodelling Hypertensive retinopathy
Eye
Atherosclerosis Vascular calcification Arterial stiffness
Large and medium arteries
Endothelial dysfunction Vasoreactivity Vascular remodelling Fibrosis and inflammation Peripheral vascular resistance
Microcirculation
LVH LA and LV dilatation AF Obstructive and non-obstructive CAD Myocardial Infarction Diastolic and/or systolic heart failure
Heart
Kidney
Glomerular arteriolar hypertension Glomerulosclerosis Albuminuria/Proteinuria GFR
Figure 2 Persistently elevated blood pressure and hypertension lead to hypertension-mediated organ damage and cardiovascular disease. AF, atrial fibrillation; CAD, coronary artery disease; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; LA, left atrial; LV, left ventricular; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy. See the supplementary data online for detailed information on sex differences.
ESC Guidelines 3929
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.19
Korotkoff sound (muffling) is used to estimate diastolic BP. Oscillometric devices estimate diastole using an algorithm that imputes from mean arterial pressure.37 Inter-arm difference: systolic BP difference of >10 mmHg when BP is measured sequentially in each arm.38 Postural/orthostatic hypotension: decrement of ≥20 mmHg in systolic BP and/or ≥10 mmHg in diastolic BP when BP is measured in the standing position at 1 and/or 3 min after standing following a 5-min period in the sitting or lying position. White-coat hypertension: BP that is above the threshold for diagnosing hypertension in the office but below the threshold in home/ ambulatory settings, e.g. ≥140/90 mmHg in office but <135/85 mmHg at home/ambulatory daytime (or 24-h BP < 130/80 mmHg). Masked hypertension: BP that is below the hypertension diagnostic threshold in the office but above the hypertension diagnostic threshold in home/ambulatory settings, e.g. <140/90 mmHg in clinic but ≥135/85 mmHg at home/ambulatory daytime (or 24-h BP ≥130/80 mmHg). Office BP: also known as clinic BP. The two terms are interchangeable. This guidelines document uses ‘office BP’ preferentially. Of note, office BP can be measured manually or using an automated device. In addition, automated office BP (AOBP) can be conducted in a setting attended by a healthcare professional or in an unattended fashion. Finally, not all office BP measurements are equal, with some facilities using a standardized method (which is recommended and outlined below) and others unfortunately using suboptimal approaches to office BP measurement. Home BP measurement (HBPM): an out-of-office approach to measuring BP when the patient measures their own BP at home using a validated monitor (usually an upper-arm oscillometric cuff device). Ambulatory BP measurement (ABPM): an out-of-office BP measurement that uses a fully automated oscillometric device, usually for a 24-h period, and measures BP at set intervals.
5.2 Practical recommendations for
measuring blood pressure 5.2.1. Clinical validation of equipment for measuring blood pressure A prerequisite of BP measurement is that it must be undertaken using a device that has been clinically validated and confirmed to be accurate. Of the commercially available oscillometric BP measurement devices, as few as 6% have been adequately tested.39–41 National and international organizations provide lists of validated monitors (e.g. www.stridebp.org, www.validatebp.org). Since the 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension, three arbiters of device accuracy (the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, the ESH, and the International Organization for Standardization) have published a universal standard for validating devices for measuring BP.42 This standard will likely become widely adopted. Validation standards and methodology need to be developed and implemented for novel BP measurement devices that are non-occlusive and ‘cuffless’.43,44
5.2.2 Office blood pressure measurement
All BP measurements can be influenced by circumstances of measurement, including position, ambient temperature, the technique of measurement, accuracy of equipment, and physical condition of the patient.45 For BP measurements in the office, we recommend following a standardized method (Figure 3).
Patient preparation: BP should be measured with the patient seated comfortably after 5 min of rest. Patients should avoid exercising and stimulants (caffeine, tobacco) for at least 30 min before measurement. The patient’s bladder should be emptied if needed.46 Patients should be seated with their legs unfolded and their back supported at the time of measurement. The arm should be supported (to avoid isometric exercise-induced increases in BP). Clothing at the location of the cuff placement should be removed; rolling up of shirt sleeves should be avoided as this can result in a tourniquet effect. BP measurement technique: auscultatory or oscillometric techniques can be used to measure BP non-invasively. The manual auscultatory approach is the traditional method of measuring systolic and diastolic BP at the brachial artery site using a stethoscope. In contrast, oscillometric devices compute mean arterial BP using the oscillation amplitude with cuff deflation (or inflation) and then estimate systolic and diastolic BP. Oscillometric devices can be semi-automated (taking one reading per activation) or fully automated (obtaining multiple readings before averaging them). Oscillometric devices are not typically validated for use in AF, and the manual auscultatory method is preferred in these circumstances when feasible.47–49 BP cuff selection and positioning: an appropriately sized cuff should be used, as an under-sized or over-sized cuff will artificially elevate or reduce BP, respectively.50 The bladder length should be 75%–100% and the width 35%–50% of the arm circumference. The arm circumference can be measured at the mid-point of the olecranon and the acromion but many cuffs include sizing indicators. The cuff should be positioned on the patient’s upper arm at the level of the heart with the lower edge of the cuff a few centimetres above the antecubital fossa. The stethoscope should not be placed under the cuff. In those with significant obesity where a correctly fitting upper arm cuff is not available, measurement at the lower arm or wrist can be considered as an alternative.51 BP measurement by manual auscultation: three BP measurements should be taken, each 1–2 min apart, and additional measurements only if the readings differ by >10 mmHg (e.g. this may occur with arrhythmias or white-coat effects). The BP recorded should be the average of the last two BP readings. BP measurement using AOBP measurement: as noted above, AOBP using oscillometric devices may be obtained with (attended) or without (unattended) clinicians or staff present. Clear evidence regarding superiority of unattended vs. attended AOBP in managing BP to reduce rates of CVD is lacking; however, because BP readings may differ for unattended vs. attended measurements,52 we advise that a consistent approach be used depending on local resource and preference. AOBP monitors typically make three or six readings at 1-min intervals and provide an average. AOBP correlates more closely with mean ABPM than with the manual auscultatory technique and may reduce measurement error and white-coat effects.53 Inter-arm BP difference: at the initial visit, BP should be measured in both arms to detect an inter-arm difference. Though devices allowing simultaneous measurement in both arms exist, sequential arm measurement is considered sufficiently reliable.54,55 Measurement in the contralateral arm should be undertaken once the three measurements in the index arm have been taken, and if a difference is detected, further measurement in the original arm is indicated to ensure the difference is consistent. If systolic BP differs by >10 mmHg between arms, subsequent measurements are obtained using the arm with the higher BP value. Significant inter-arm BP differences may reflect arterial stenosis or Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.20
coarctation of the aorta, which may require investigation. Also, of note, in some patients one arm is preferred to the other for routine BP measurement (e.g. to avoid measurement of BP in an arm with an arteriovenous fistula or an arm where axillary lymph node dissection has occurred). Postural/orthostatic hypotension: patients should be assessed for orthostatic hypotension at the initial visit and if concerning symptoms arise. After 5 min of rest in the sitting or lying position, BP should be measured at 1 min and/or 3 min after standing, with a threshold for orthostatic hypotension of ≥20/10 mmHg (systolic BP/diastolic BP) drop. Measurement after lying may be more sensitive for detecting orthostatic hypotension and may better predict falls but may be less feasible than measurement after sitting in clinical practice.56
Pulse assessment: heart rate should be recorded at the initial visit and arrhythmia excluded.
5.2.3 Home blood pressure measurement
HBPM is an out-of-office approach to measuring BP when the patient measures their own BP at home using a validated monitor (usually an upper-arm oscillometric cuff device).57,58 A consistent approach to
>10 mmHg
1 2 3
4
5
6
7
8 Office blood pressure measurement
Measure after 5 min seated comfortably in a
quiet environment Use a validated device with an appropriate cuff
size based on arm
circumference Place the BP cuff at the level of the heart with the patient's
back and arm supported
Assess for orthostatic hypotension at Ist visit and
thereafter by symptoms Measure BP three times
(1–2 min apart) and average the last 2 readings
Record heart rate and exclude arrhythmia
by pulse palpation Measure BP in both arms at the Ist visit to
detect between arm
differences Obtain further measurements if the
readings differ by
>10 mmHg
90 62
Figure 3 Summary of office blood pressure measurement. BP, blood pressure.
ESC Guidelines 3931
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.21
HBPM should be used (Figure 4). Patients should be counselled to follow the same preparation steps as used in clinics, which are outlined in Section 5.2.2. Two measurements should be taken at each measurement session, performed 1–2 min apart. Measurements should be made twice a day (morning and evening) at the same time for a minimum of 3 days and up to 7 days.59 At the end of the measurement period, all readings are averaged. If the average after 3 days is close to the treatment threshold, then measurement should continue for the full 7 days. Patients should be informed to keep a record of their home BP values and to ask their healthcare provider that the device accuracy be intermittently checked. Devices older than 4 years may be inaccurate and, if inaccurate, should be replaced.60
An average HBPM of ≥135/85 mmHg (equivalent to an office BP of ≥140/90 mmHg) should be used to diagnose hypertension and an average systolic BP of 120–134 mmHg or diastolic BP of 70–84 mmHg should be used to diagnose elevated BP. Of note, we use the same lower BP threshold (120/70 mmHg) for both office and HBPM in defining elevated BP.61
3
Home-based blood pressure measurement
1
Use a validated BP
device 2
Measure BP in a quiet room after 5 min of rest with arm
and back supported
Obtain two readings
on each occasion,
1–2 min apart
4
Obtain readings twice a day
(morninga and evening) for at least 3 and ideally 7 days
average HBPM ≥135/85 mmHg
Hypertension:
5
Record and average all
readings and present
results to clinician
Figure 4 Summary of home blood pressure measurement. BP, blood pressure; HBPM, home blood pressure measurement. aMorning HBPM readings should be obtained before breakfast and before intake of medication but not immediately after awakening. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.22
5.2.4 Ambulatory blood pressure measurement
ABPM (summarized in Figure 5) is an out-of-office BP measurement that uses a fully automated device, usually for a 24-h period. The devices measure BP by the oscillometric method and are programmed to measure BP at set intervals. Readings are usually obtained at 15–30 min intervals during the day (typically 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.) and 30–60 min intervals at night (typically 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.). The software usually provides average BP measurements for daytime, night-time, and 24 h. A minimum of 70% useable BP recordings is required for a valid measurement session, typically numbering ≥27 measurements over 24 h. Preferably, seven nocturnal readings should also be obtained.62 However, emerging data indicate that ≥8/≥4 wake/sleep readings may be adequate if more cannot be obtained.63 Prior to using mean ABPM values (either 24 h, daytime, or night-time) the raw BP values at each measurement should be reviewed for possible outlier or erroneous values. A diary should record activities (e.g. meals and exercise) and sleep time to assist interpretation. The diagnostic thresholds for elevated BP and hypertension using ABPM, and comparison with office BP and HBPM, are provided in Table 5.61,64
1 2 3
4
Ambulatory blood pressure measurement
Use a validated BP
device Device usually records BP at 15–30 min intervals during the day and 30–60 min at night A minimum of 70% usable BP recordings
is required
A diary of the patient's activities,
intake of medications and sleep
time should be completed
ABPM ≥130/80 mmHg
over 24 h or ≥135/85 mmHg for the
daytime average or ≥120/70 mmHg for the
night-time average
Hypertension:
Figure 5 Summary of ambulatory blood pressure measurement. ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure measurement; BP, blood pressure.
Table 5 Comparison of office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure measurement thresholds for elevated blood pressure and hypertension
Office BP (mmHg)a Home BP
(mmHg) Daytime ABPM
(mmHg) 24 h ABPM
(mmHg) Night-time
ABPM (mmHg)
Reference Non-elevated BP <120/70 <120/70 <120/70 <115/65 <110/60 Elevated BP 120/70–<140/90 120/70–<135/85 120/70–<135/85 115/65–<130/80 110/60–<120/70 Hypertension ≥140/90 ≥135/85 ≥135/85 ≥130/80 ≥120/70 © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure. aThe BP thresholds provided assume that a standardized approach to office BP measurement is performed (Figure 3). However, evidence indicates that office BP measurement in routine clinical settings is often not done using a standardized approach and, in this case, the routine office BP value may be 5–10 mmHg higher than it would have been if measured using the recommended standardized approach.65,66
ESC Guidelines 3933
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.23
5.2.5 Comparison of home and ambulatory blood
pressure monitoring There is overlap between home and ambulatory monitoring in terms of differentiating between hypertensive phenotypes. However, around 15% of people will have diagnostic disagreement, of whom approximately 50% will represent clinically significant differences of >5 mmHg.67 The advantages and disadvantages of home and ambulatory monitoring are outlined in Table 6.
5.3 What is the best method for
measuring blood pressure to diagnose hypertension? 5.3.1. Blood pressure measurement for hypertension screening Opportunistic screening is typically performed using office BP measurement and is key in detecting possible hypertension. However, a single screening office BP alone does not typically have sufficient diagnostic test performance to establish a diagnosis, especially for BP values close to diagnostic thresholds. Therefore, a single screening office BP requires some form of repeat BP assessment to confirm a diagnosis (preferably out-of-office or repeat office if out-of-office is not available). Relatedly, the BP threshold for acting on a screening office BP by conducting repeat BP assessments should also be lower than the office BP threshold used for diagnosing hypertension. This latter consideration is particularly relevant in the presence of increased CVD risk or markers of HMOD. Also of note, populations where masked hypertension is more prevalent include men, those who smoke, those with excessive alcohol intake, or those with diabetes or obesity.68,69 While a screening office BP of >160/100 mmHg is almost always consistent with a diagnosis of hypertension, a small proportion of patients will have extreme white-coat effects that motivate prompt repeat BP assessment.68
Hypertension screening approaches are discussed further in Section 7.1.
5.3.2 Blood pressure measurement for diagnosing
hypertension After detecting high BP in the office, subsequent BP measurement for diagnosing hypertension depends on the clinical circumstances. Office BP has lower specificity than ABPM for detecting hypertension, so diagnosis based on office BP alone is less desirable unless resources do not allow out-of-office measurements.70 For screening BP of 160–179 mmHg systolic or 100–109 mmHg diastolic, prompt confirmation (within 1 month) using either office or out-of-office methods is recommended, as delays in treatment are associated with increased CVD event rates.71 For BP of ≥180/110 mmHg, assessment for hypertensive emergency is recommended. In the setting of hypertensive emergency, immediately commencing BP-lowering treatment is recommended, otherwise, prompt confirmation (preferably within a week) can be considered prior to commencing treatment (Sections 7 and 10). For screening BP of 140–159/90–99 mmHg, out-of-office BP should be measured to confirm the diagnosis.72 When treatment of elevated BP is being considered (e.g. 120–139/70–89 mmHg) for individuals with high risk CVD conditions or sufficiently high 10-year predicted CVD risk, out-of-office BP measurement is recommended, both to confirm BP and to assess for masked hypertension. Out-of-office measurements may also be helpful for individuals with office BP of 130–139/85–89 mmHg to diagnose masked hypertension. Further details on the diagnostic evaluation of hypertension are provided in Section 7.2.
5.4 What is the best method for
measuring blood pressure for long-term management of hypertension? While repeat office measurement of BP remains the commonest approach to long-term management of hypertension, several lines of investigation support augmenting office BP measurements with out-of-office assessment.
5.4.1 Home monitoring
There are over 50 trials of different self-monitoring-based interventions.73 Self-monitoring is associated with lower mean systolic BP at 12 months [−3.2 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI) −4.9 to −1.6 mmHg].74 Furthermore, there are known benefits of telemonitoring, digital interventions, and mobile health in managing BP.75–78 Self-monitoring is also likely to be cost-effective.79 Unfortunately, in clinical practice, some patients may not provide reliable information on their home BP, and both their device and measurement technique need to be checked.
5.4.2 Ambulatory monitoring
ABPM provides a reference BP measurement but repeat ABPM testing is sometimes not practical due to resource constraints and, uncommonly, low patient acceptability.80 There is a paucity of data on treatment guided by ABPM vs. that of office or HBPM measurements. A trial of treatment guided by HBPM vs. clinic and ambulatory monitoring found equivalence in BP control and HMOD.81 Other studies reported a non-significant trend to worse BP control with ambulatory vs. office BP monitoring, though the ambulatory group also received fewer
Table 6 Comparison of ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring Ambulatory monitoring Advantages • Can identify white-coat and masked hypertension • Measurement in real-life settings and during usual activities • Stronger prognostic evidence • Night-time readings • Abundant information from a single investigation, including short-term
diurnal BP variability • Additional BP phenotyping (e.g. nocturnal dipping status) Disadvantages • Relatively expensive and sometimes limited availability • Can be uncomfortable and affect sleep Home monitoring Advantages • Identify white-coat and masked hypertension • Cheap and widely available • Measurement at home, which may be more relaxed than at doctor’s office • Patient engagement in BP measurement and telemedicine potential • Easily repeated and used over longer periods to assess day-to-day BP variability Disadvantages • Only static BP at rest is typically available • Potential for measurement error due to improper measurement technique or unvalidated or poorly calibrated device • Nocturnal readings not usually possible © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.24
medications.82 Potential advantages of ABPM over HBPM include diagnosing nocturnal hypertension or symptomatic transient hypotension or hypertension with exertion. As such, ABPM and HBPM should be considered complementary and additive, rather than competing approaches to long-term BP management.83
5.5 Measuring blood pressure in selected
groups 5.5.1. Pregnancy Monitoring BP during pregnancy is typically done at antenatal visits, which vary dependent on trimester (with increasing frequency towards term). BP tends to reach a nadir at 20–30 weeks of pregnancy before increasing towards term at 40 weeks.84 Only a small number of automated oscillometric BP monitors have been adequately validated in pregnancy and several have failed, usually due to providing BP values that are erroneously high.85 Auscultatory measurement with sphygmomanometry is consequently the clinical standard in pregnancy.85 Self-monitoring at home is not yet proven to be effective in gestational hypertension.86,87 While norms for BP during pregnancy remain unclear, the 2022 Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy (CHAP) trial indicated benefit of targeting clinic BP below 140/90 mmHg.88 Consideration of secondary causes of hypertension is important in young women with gestational hypertension. Further details are provided in Section 9.2 and the 2018 ESC Guideline for the management of cardiovascular disease during pregnancy.89
5.5.2 Atrial fibrillation
Hypertension is a risk factor for AF.90,91 Oscillometric BP monitors are not always accurate in the presence of AF, due to the greater variability of BP beat to beat, so multiple auscultatory measurements are recommended.48,92,93 Some oscillometric BP monitors include an algorithm for detecting AF, but an electrocardiogram (ECG) is still required to confirm the diagnosis.49,94
5.5.3 Orthostatic hypotension
Postural or orthostatic hypotension is common,95,96 present in approximately 10% of all hypertensive adults and up to 50% of older institutionalized adults.97,98 Orthostatic hypotension is defined as a BP drop of ≥20/10 mmHg 1 and/or 3 min after standing following a 5-min period in the seated or lying position.99–101 Diagnosis is made in the office. Routine ABPM is not currently suitable for formally assessing orthostatic hypotension,102 though it may help in some cases, particularly when accompanied by a patient symptom diary.103
5.6 Novel methods of measuring blood
pressure New methods to measure BP are under development. Continuous office and out-of-office BP recordings and ABPM and HBPM have been developed that derive beat-to-beat, reading-to-reading, and day-to-day BP variability. However, there is no agreement on the optimum approach to measuring variability, and there is no trial evidence that reducing BP variability specifically can reduce CVD events.104 Other emerging technologies include wearable, wrist-based BP measurement devices, devices evaluating central BP, and cuffless devices implementing plethysmographic or other technologies.105,106 However, there is at present insufficient scientific consensus on the accuracy standards and validation procedures that these cuffless devices must comply with prior to commercialization.43,44,107–109
In view of these issues, none of these cuffless measurement modalities are currently recommended for routine clinical use.
Recommendation Table 1 — Recommendations for measuring blood pressure (see Evidence Tables 1–8)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
It is recommended to measure BP using a validated and calibrated device, to enforce the correct measurement technique, and to apply a consistent approach to BP measurement for each patient.41,42 I B All adult patients (≥18 years) are recommended to have their office and/or out-of-office BP measured on an opportunistic basis and recorded in their medical file, and be told what their current BP is. I C Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended for diagnostic purposes, particularly because it can detect both white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. Where out-of-office measurements are not logistically and/or economically feasible, then it is recommended that the diagnosis be confirmed with a repeat office BP measurement using the correct standardized measurement technique.70 I B It is recommended that office BP should be measured in both arms at least at the first visit, because a between-arm systolic BP difference of >10 mmHg is associated with an increased CVD risk and may indicate arterial stenosis.55,110 I B If a between-arm difference of >10 mmHg in systolic BP is recorded, then it is recommended that all subsequent BP readings use the arm with the higher BP reading.110 I B Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended for ongoing management to quantify the effects of treatment and guide BP-lowering medication titration, and/or identify possible causes of side effects (e.g. symptomatic hypotension). Where out-of-office measurements are not logistically and/ or economically feasible, then ongoing management is recommended to be based on repeated office BP measurements using the correct standardized measurement technique.74,111,112 I B It is recommended that all patients undergoing BP measurement also undergo pulse palpation at rest to determine heart rate and arrhythmias such as AF.113 I C Most automated oscillometric monitors have not been validated for BP measurement in AF; BP measurement should be considered using a manual auscultatory method in these circumstances where possible.47–49 IIa C
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3935
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.25
6 Definition and classification of
elevated blood pressure and hypertension, and cardiovascular disease risk assessment
6.1 Definition and classification of
elevated blood pressure and hypertension Epidemiological studies demonstrate a continuous and log-linear association between BP and adverse CVD outcomes.22,32,33,114,115 Starting at levels as low as 90 mmHg systolic, the higher the BP the higher the relative risk of CVD including atherosclerosis.32,114 These observational data are complemented by randomized clinical trials (RCTs),116 which have provided experimental evidence regarding the BP range for which BP lowering with treatment is proven to reduce CVD events. Of note, some studies suggest a stronger relative risk for CVD for a given BP among females compared with males.117,118 A healthy lifestyle should be encouraged for all adults to prevent an increase in BP and development of hypertension.119,120 To aid pharmacological treatment decisions, the 2024 ESC Guidelines recommend a simplified categorization of adults according to their BP (Figure 6). In compiling this categorization, priority was given to evidence from randomized trials over observational data. However, it is important to reiterate that the risk of CVD attributable to BP is continuous and that interpreting randomized trial data is an iterative process involving an element of subjectivity. As such, no categorization of BP can be considered immutable or flawless. The 2024 Guidelines define hypertension as a confirmed office systolic BP of ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP of ≥90 mmHg. For this diagnosis to be made, confirmation is recommended with out-of-office measurements (HBPM or ABPM) or at least one repeat office measurement at a subsequent visit, as detailed in Section 5 and Section 7.2. This definition is based on several factors. First, meta-analyses of randomized trials provide evidence among all adults and across various settings for the benefit of BP-lowering therapy among patients with BP above this threshold.116,121,122 Second, most adults with BP above this threshold are at increased CVD risk, typically with 10-year risk estimates of ≥10% for fatal and non-fatal CVD events.123–125 The higher the patient’s baseline absolute risk for CVD, the greater the net benefit from BP-lowering treatment and, at the population level, the lower the estimated number needed to treat (NNT).126–128 Third, this more traditional BP threshold for hypertension is already widely used by policymakers to define a disease state, and maintaining this BP threshold to define hypertension (vs. lowering it) does not require most adults to be labelled with what is widely considered a disease.129
Here, we introduce a new BP category called ‘elevated BP’, which is defined as an office systolic BP of 120–139 mmHg or diastolic BP of 70–89 mmHg. Within this BP range, the efficacy of BP-lowering therapy has been established in meta-analyses of RCTs,116 but average CVD risk in the elevated BP group is not sufficiently high to merit drug treatment in all patients.123,124,130 Pharmacological treatment initiation is, however, suggested for a subgroup of patients within this BP range who are at increased global risk of CVD as identified by the risk stratification approach outlined in Sections 6.3, 6.4, and 8. Non-elevated BP is defined as a systolic BP of <120 mmHg and a diastolic BP of <70 mmHg. Fewer individuals within this BP range are at increased risk of CVD,124 and evidence for CVD benefit with BP-lowering pharmacological treatment is lacking due to an absence of trials. We use the term ‘non-elevated BP’ to define this BP category in recognition that these are treatment categories and not prognostic categories. Because the relative risk for CVD starts to increase at BP below this threshold (even as low as 90 mmHg systolic BP), particularly among women,117,118 we avoid terms like ‘normal BP’, ‘optimal BP’, or ‘normotension’ in defining this category.
6.2 Principles of a risk-based approach for
managing blood pressure and preventing cardiovascular disease In the context of BP-lowering interventions, randomized trials demonstrate a consistent relative risk reduction in adverse CVD outcomes per unit reduction in BP.131,139 However, many medical interventions incur costs and have side effects. Therefore, guidance is needed on selecting patients most likely to benefit from BP-lowering treatment. This is especially true among adults with elevated BP (office systolic BP of 120–139 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of 70–89 mmHg). Practical aspects for implementing a risk-based approach are further discussed in Section 8.
6.2.1 Role of cardiovascular disease risk assessment
The risk of adverse CVD outcomes increases log-linearly with constant increments in systolic BP and diastolic BP.22,32,33,114,140 Concurrently, at higher BP, there is clustering of additional CVD risk factors.141,142 Consequently, many patients with hypertension will have an estimated 10-year risk for CVD events of ≥10%,116,121,122 which, for the purposes of these guidelines, is considered sufficiently high risk to merit consideration of BP-lowering treatment in the setting of elevated BP.143 Using BP thresholds for hypertension alone for allocating treatment would lead to under-treatment of many high-risk patients.144,145,115 A substantial proportion of excess CVD events attributable to BP occur in patients with BP levels below the traditional threshold for
An assessment for orthostatic hypotension (≥20 systolic BP and/or ≥10 diastolic BP mmHg drop at 1 and/or 3 min after standing) should be considered at least at the initial diagnosis of elevated BP or hypertension and thereafter if suggestive symptoms arise. This should be performed after the patient is first lying or sitting for 5 min. IIa C Other BP measures and indices (pulse pressure, BP variability, exercise BP) may be considered to provide additional clinical information on CVD risk in some circumstances. IIb C © ESC 2024
AF, atrial fibrillation; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 2 — Recommendations for categorizing blood pressure (see Evidence Table 9)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
It is recommended that BP be categorized as non-elevated BP, elevated BP, and hypertension to aid treatment decisions.116,121,122,131–138 I B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.26
hypertension diagnosis. As the efficacy of BP lowering on preventing CVD events extends down to a systolic BP of 120 mmHg and a diastolic BP of 70 mmHg,116,135,136,146 patients with elevated BP and increased CVD risk can also derive benefit from BP-lowering treatment.124,145 The heterogeneity in CVD risk among adults with elevated BP is larger than in those with hypertension, as such patients tend to be younger, and their absolute CVD risk depends more on the prevalence of concomitant CVD risk factors.123,147 Consequently, formally estimating the patient’s CVD risk, encapsulating demographics and other CVD risk factors, is recommended to guide BP-lowering treatment decisions among patients with elevated BP.148–151 6.3 Predicting cardiovascular disease risk
Certain conditions on their own are associated with sufficient CVD risk such that patients with elevated BP alongside these conditions can be considered for BP-lowering therapy (Figure 7). These include moderate or severe chronic kidney disease (CKD),152 established clinical CVD (coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, or heart failure)153–158 concomitant HMOD (see Figure 7; Section 7; Supplementary data online, Table S1),31,159 diabetes mellitus, and familial hypercholesterolaemia (probable or definite).160–163 Regarding diabetes, some adults aged <60 years with type 2 diabetes and elevated BP have 10-year CVD risk of <10%. Accordingly, the diabetes-specific
Non-elevated blood pressure
Office BP
SBP <120 mmHg and DBP <70 mmHg
HBPM
SBP <120 mmHg and DBP <70 mmHg
ABPM
Daytime SBP <120 mmHg and Daytime DBP <70 mmHg Elevated blood pressure
Office BP
SBP 120–139 mmHg or DBP 70–89 mmHg
HBPM
SBP 120–134 mmHg or DBP 70–84 mmHg
ABPM
Daytime SBP 120–134 mmHg or Daytime DBP 70–84 mmHg Hypertension
Office BP
SBP ≥140 mmHg or DBP ≥90 mmHg
HBPM
SBP ≥135 mmHg or DBP ≥85 mmHg
ABPM
Daytime SBP ≥135 mmHg or Daytime DBP ≥85 mmHg
Insufficient evidence confirming
the efficacy and safety of BP pharmacological treatment Risk stratify to identify
individuals with high cardiovascular risk for BP pharmacological treatment Cardiovascular risk is sufficiently high to merit
BP pharmacological treatment initiation
Blood pressure classification
The diagnosis of hypertension and elevated BP requires confirmation using out-of-office measurements (HBPM or ABPM) or at least one additional subsequent office measurement
Figure 6 Blood pressure categories. ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; SBP, systolic blood pressure. We note that the respective non-daytime ABPM thresholds for elevated BP and hypertension diagnosis are listed in Section 5 (Table 5).
ESC Guidelines 3937
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.27
Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2)-Diabetes riskprediction model should be considered to confirm CVD risk is sufficiently high (≥10%) among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are aged <60 years.164 In the absence of these sufficiently high-risk conditions, risk-prediction models (SCORE2 and SCORE-OP) have been developed in the general population to predict 10-year risk of CVD.165,166 In adults with elevated BP without the above sufficiently high-risk conditions, risk-prediction models are recommended to inform BP-lowering treatment decisions. Risk-prediction models are more accurate than clinical judgment or tallying of individual risk factors.167–169
6.3.1. 10-year cardiovascular disease risk-prediction models Prediction models differ in their input variables, predicted endpoints (outputs), and populations in which they were derived and validated. We endorse the use of SCORE2 for individuals aged 40–69 years and SCORE2–Older Persons (SCORE2-OP) for individuals aged ≥70 years for predicting 10-year global risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD events (stroke or myocardial infarction).165,166 The management of adults aged <40 years is discussed in Section 9.1. The SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP models are preferred over other 10-year risk-prediction models, as they predict both fatal and non-fatal CVD events, have been validated and recalibrated to European populations, and because SCORE2-OP is adjusted for the competing risk of non-cardiovascular mortality. Calculating SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP is recommended for individuals with elevated BP who are not already at sufficiently high CVD risk due to established CVD, moderate or severe CKD, probable or definite familial hypercholesterolaemia, diabetes mellitus, or HMOD.165,166,170
For the purpose of BP-lowering treatment decisions, individuals with elevated BP and a predicted 10-year CVD risk of ≥10% by SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP are considered in these guidelines to be sufficiently high risk, with details on the choice of lifestyle or drugs to facilitate BP-lowering treatment in this setting provided in Section 8.171,172 A number of considerations influenced our choice to recommend a single risk threshold of ≥10%, vs. the alternative option of using age-specific risk thresholds, such as those provided in the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice.170 For example, contemporary data indicate the heightened importance of BP control in older adults due to their higher absolute CVD risk (resulting in a lower NNT) and concomitantly to reduce age-dependent adverse outcomes attributable to increased BP, such as dementia. Recent treat-to-target trials (testing systolic BP targets of approximately 120 mmHg) used a single CVD risk inclusion threshold and were also
Moderate or severe
CKD eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or albuminuria ≥30 mg/g (≥3 mg/mmol)
Familial hypercholesterolaemia Probable or definite familial hypercholesterolaemia
Diabetes
mellitus Type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitusc
Established clinical cardiovascular disease Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseasea
Heart failure
Other forms of hypertension-
mediated organ damage Cardiacb
Vascularb
Figure 7 Sufficiently high cardiovascular risk conditions that warrant blood pressure-lowering treatment among adults with elevated blood pressure. CKD, chronic kidney disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate. aCoronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease. bSee Section 7. cSCORE2-Diabetes should be considered to identify lower-risk individuals (<10% 10-year CVD risk), who may not require BP-lowering medication, particularly in individuals <60 years. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.28
enriched with older adults.135,136,146 In addition, the average CVD event rate in the control arm of a landmark meta-analysis showing the benefits of more intensive BP-lowering treatment was approximately equivalent to a 10% 10-year risk.116 Finally, the task force, which included patient members, felt that age-specific risk thresholds could result in BP treatment decisions being made solely based on age, which is difficult to support scientifically or otherwise. To try to avoid any confusion with the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice, we use the terms ‘sufficiently high risk’ or ‘increased risk’ to describe a person with 10-year CVD risk of ≥10% (rather than the terms ‘high risk’ or ‘very high risk’). 6.4 Refining cardiovascular disease risk
estimation beyond risk models The SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP risk-prediction models incorporate traditional risk factors such as age, sex, systolic BP, cholesterol values, and smoking status to predict 10-year risk of CVD.165,166 However, they do not include ‘non-traditional’ CVD risk factors (detailed below and hereafter termed ’risk modifiers’). Non-traditional CVD risk modifiers can improve the predictive performance (i.e. discrimination) of other CVD risk-prediction models, and may also apply to SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP.173 For example, among individuals with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year predicted CVD risk by SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP (estimates of 5% to <10%), these nontraditional CVD risk modifiers may help up-classify the patient’s risk and thereby prompt BP-lowering treatment (Figure 8).
6.4.1 Sex-specific non-traditional cardiovascular
disease risk modifiers Sex differences in the distribution of traditional and non-traditional CVD risk factors have been documented among patients with hypertension.174 Although sex itself is included as an input variable in the SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP, and though these models were derived separately in men and women, some sex-specific, nontraditional risk modifiers were not included, and their associated impact on CVD risk may not be fully captured by SCORE2, SCORE2-OP, or SCORE2-Diabetes. The relationship between BP and overall CVD risk is similar in both sexes, though some studies even suggest a stronger relative risk for CVD for a given BP level among females compared with males.117 Female-specific, non-traditional CVD risk modifiers often arise at specific times throughout the life course, especially during pregnancy and the peri-partum period. Women with a history of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia, have a two-fold higher long-term risk of CVD vs. women without these pregnancy conditions.175–177 The relative long-term CVD risk associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy may also be higher in younger vs. older pregnant women.178,179 Most, but not all, of the excess CVD risk associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy is captured by conventional CVD risk factors.176,178 Gestational diabetes is independently associated with an approximately two-fold increase in the long-term relative risk of CVD events.180 Other complications such as preterm delivery, recurrent miscarriage, and one or more stillbirths are associated with a 40% relative increase in long-term CVD risk.181–185 Accordingly, a history of specific pregnancy complications, including gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, pre-term delivery, one or more stillbirths, and recurrent miscarriage, can be considered as non-traditional CVD risk modifiers to up-classify women with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year predicted CVD risk (5% to <10%) to sufficiently high risk, thereby influencing the risk-based management of their elevated BP. Evidence whether other female-specific conditions (infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome, and premature menopause) and male-specific conditions (androgenic alopecia and erectile dysfunction) improve prediction of CVD sufficiently to inform risk-based BP-lowering treatment decisions is inconclusive at present.
Recommendation Table 3 — Recommendations for assessing cardiovascular disease risk among individuals with elevated blood pressure (office systolic blood pressure 120–139 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure 70–89 mmHg) (see Evidence Tables 10 and 11)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
It is recommended to use a risk-based approach in the treatment of elevated BP, and individuals with moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia are considered at increased risk for CVD events.31,153–159,161–163,172 I B SCORE2 is recommended for assessing 10-year risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged 40–69 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia.143,165,172 I B SCORE2-OP is recommended for assessing the 10-year risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged ≥70 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia.143,166,172 I B It is recommended that, irrespective of age, individuals with elevated BP and a SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP CVD risk of ≥10% be considered at increased risk for CVD for the purposes of risk-based management of their elevated BP.143,165,166,172 I B SCORE2-Diabetes should be considered to estimate CVD risk among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with elevated BP, particularly if they are <60 years of age.164 IIa B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons. Established CVD: coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, or heart failure. For details on HMOD see Section 7. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3939
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.29
6.4.2 Non-traditional cardiovascular disease risk
modifiers shared by men and women In addition to sex-specific risk modifiers, several other non-traditional risk factors are associated with an increased risk of CVD, but few have been shown to improve risk prediction or discrimination beyond traditional CVD risk factors. We advise considering high-CVD-risk race/ethnicity (e.g. South Asian),186–188 family history of premature onset atherosclerotic CVD (CVD event in males aged <55 years and/or females <65 years),189,190 socio-economic deprivation,191 inflammatory conditions (e.g. systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriasis affecting 10% or more of body surface area or requiring systemic therapy),192–202 HIV,203–205 and severe mental illness (major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia)206–208 as shared non-traditional risk modifiers to up-classify the risk of individuals with a borderline increased 10-year predicted risk using SCORE2/SCORE2-OP (5% to <10%) to sufficiently high CVD risk.
Sex-specific modifiers
(Class IIa) Shared modifiers
(Class IIa)
High-risk ethnicity
Gestational hypertension
Gestational diabetes
Pre-eclampsia
Pre-term delivery
One or more stillbirth
Recurrent miscarriage Family history of premature onset ASCVD
Socio-economic deprivation
Auto-immune inflammatory diseases
Severe mental illness
Risk modifiers
HIV
Figure 8 Cardiovascular disease risk modifiers to consider for up-classification of risk. ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.30
6.4.3 Additional risk decision tests
Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring improves CVD risk prediction and reclassifies risk when added to conventional CVD risk factor-based estimation models.209,210 A CAC score of >100 Agatston units or ≥75th percentile for age, sex, and ethnicity favours up-classification of CVD risk.127 Internal or external carotid plaque may also improve CVD risk prediction.211 Similarly, femoral artery plaque detection may improve CVD risk prediction.212–214 Arterial stiffness, as assessed by pulse wave velocity (PWV), is associated with increased risk of CVD events and improves CVD risk stratification.215–218 Common arterial stiffness thresholds for increased risk include carotid–femoral PWV of >10 m/s and brachial–ankle PWV of >14 m/s. After assessing 10-year predicted CVD risk and non-traditional risk factors, if a riskbased treatment decision remains uncertain for patients with elevated BP, it is reasonable to measure a CAC score or, alternatively, carotid or femoral plaque, or arterial stiffness; most especially after shared decision-making with the patient and after considering cost (see Section 7 for more details on these tests). There is also evidence that elevated cardiac biomarker levels (specifically high-sensitivity cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide/N-terminus B-type natriuretic peptide) are significant and effective risk modifiers,219,220 with further supportive data from hypertensive participants.159,221,222 Of note, these cardiac biomarkers can be considered markers of HMOD (Section 7); however, we focus on them in this risk modifier section because they may be elevated due to other reasons besides high BP (such as atherosclerosis or heart rhythm disease). 6.5 Summary of the cardiovascular disease
risk stratification approach for allocating blood pressure treatment Measured BP combined with 10-year CVD risk-prediction models and non-traditional risk modifiers should be used for stratifying risk when allocating BP-lowering treatment for persons with elevated BP (Figure 9). It is important to stress here that patients with confirmed hypertension are recommended to receive BP-lowering treatment and no further risk stratification is needed. For patients with elevated BP, the presence of diabetes, familial hypercholesterolaemia, established CVD (defined as prior acute or chronic coronary syndrome, cerebrovascular disease, symptomatic peripheral arterial disease, or heart failure), moderate or severe CKD, or HMOD confers increased CVD risk. One caveat is that, specifically for individuals with elevated BP and type 2 diabetes mellitus only aged <60 years, SCORE2-Diabetes should be considered to identify lower CVD risk individuals (<10% over 10 years). Otherwise, for patients without these high-risk conditions, 10-year risk of CVD should be calculated using SCORE2 (if aged 40–69 years) and SCORE2-OP (if aged ≥70 years). Patients with elevated BP and a 10-year predicted risk of CVD events ≥10% are considered sufficiently high risk to warrant BP-lowering treatment (either by lifestyle or drug treatment, see Section 8). For patients with elevated BP and borderline increased predicted CVD risk by SCORE2/SCORE2-OP (5% to <10% over 10 years), up-classification of risk may be considered in the presence of sex-specific or shared non-traditional risk modifiers. After considering sex-specific and shared non-traditional risk modifiers, if a risk-based BP-lowering treatment decision remains uncertain, it may be reasonable to measure CAC score, carotid or femoral plaque, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or B-type natriuretic peptide biomarkers, or arterial stiffness. Risk stratification for patients with non-elevated BP (systolic BP of <120 mmHg and diastolic BP of <70 mmHg) is not required for the purpose of allocating BP-lowering treatment, as the safety and efficacy of commencing BP-lowering treatment below this threshold is uncertain. Risk assessment may nonetheless be needed in this setting when considering other prevention therapies (e.g. lipid lowering).
Recommendation Table 4 — Recommendations for refining cardiovascular disease risk (see Evidence Tables 12–14)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
History of pregnancy complications (gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, pre-term delivery, pre-eclampsia, one or more stillbirths, and recurrent miscarriage) are sex-specific risk modifiers that should be considered to up-classify individuals with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk). 183,184,223,224 IIa B
High-risk ethnicity (e.g. South Asian), family history of premature onset atherosclerotic CVD, socio-economic deprivation, auto-immune inflammatory disorders, HIV, and severe mental illness are risk modifiers shared by both sexes that should be considered to up-classify individuals with elevated BP and borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk). 186–191,193,198,202,204,208 IIa B
Continued After assessing 10-year predicted CVD risk and
non-traditional CVD risk modifiers, if a risk-based BP-lowering treatment decision remains uncertain for individuals with elevated BP, measuring CAC score, carotid or femoral plaque using ultrasound, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or B-type natriuretic peptide biomarkers, or arterial stiffness using pulse wave velocity, may be considered to improve risk stratification among patients with borderline increased 10-year CVD risk (5% to <10% risk) after shared decision-making and considering costs.209–211,215,218,225,226 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CAC, coronary artery calcium; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3941
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.31
Patient with elevated BPa office SBP 120–139 mmHg or
DBP 70–89 mmHg
Y
Established CVD, moderate/severe CKD,
HMOD, DM, or FH
(Class I)
N
Calculate SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP
(Class I) Patient with T2DM (only)
and <60 years old
10-year predicted CVD risk
Any of the following: Gestational diabetes Gestational hypertension Pre-eclampsia Pre-term delivery One or more still births Recurrent miscarriage
N
Consider shared risk modifiers
(Class IIa)
Any of the following: High-risk ethnicity Family history of premature onset ASCVD Socio-economic deprivation Auto-immune diseases Severe mental illness HIV
N
If still uncertain, shared decision-making informed by risk tools
(Class IIb)
Any of the following meeting abnormal criteria: CAC score Carotid or femoral plaque High-sensitivity cardiac troponin NT-proBNP Pulse wave velocity
Lifestyle measures
to reduce BP
(Class I) Reassess risk/BP one year later
(Class IIa) N Lifestyle measures
to reduce BP
(Class I) After 3 months of lifestyle measures, pharmacological treatment for patients with
≥130/80 mmHg
(Class I)
Y N
Y
Y
Calculate SCORE2- Diabetes
(Class IIa)
Y
<5% 5% – <10% ≥10%
Consider sex-specific risk modifiers
(Class IIa)
aExercise caution when considering treating persons with elevated BP and;
Moderate-to-severe frailty Symptomatic orthostatic hypotension Age ≥85 years
Figure 9 Summary of cardiovascular disease risk-stratification approach for blood pressure treatment in adults with elevated blood pressure. ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; BP, blood pressure; CAC, coronary artery calcium; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; DM, diabetes mellitus; FH, familial hypercholesterolaemia; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.32
7 Diagnosing hypertension and
investigating underlying causes
7.1 Screening for hypertension
Hypertension is predominantly an asymptomatic condition that is typically detected by systematic or opportunistic screening in a healthcare setting. Systematic screening refers to any process where individuals are identified and invited to a healthcare setting solely to measure their BP and CVD risk profile. Opportunistic screening refers to BP being measured when the patient presents to a healthcare setting for any reason, such as a routine check-up or the treatment of an acute or chronic condition. Self-screening and non-physician screening are also increasingly used.227–230 Few data are available on the effectiveness of different hypertension screening strategies to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension.231–233 More evidence is needed before systematic screening programmes with BP measurement can be recommended in all adults to reduce CVD events.231 Opportunistic BP screening in a primary care setting appears effective, with an estimated 90% of all adults aged >40 years in the UK having a BP check within a 5-year time period,234 though these findings may not extrapolate to other countries. When patients provide HBPM recordings, these can also be used as part of an opportunistic screening programme (see Section 5.2).235 Despite ongoing uncertainty about the effect of hypertension screening programmes on CVD outcomes, many studies have demonstrated that screening (mostly opportunistic screening) increases hypertension detection, and that the benefits of screening likely outweigh harms.70 Global initiatives to raise BP awareness, such as the May Measurement Month,228 or targeted initiatives, such as the barbershop health outreach programmes,229 are successful examples of BP screening campaigns. Screening for hypertension, like for global CVD risk assessment, should be intermittently repeated, e.g. every 3 years. Considering the rate of progression to hypertension in European population samples,236 it is reasonable to measure BP at least every 3 years in the case of non-elevated BP and low–moderate CVD risk (i.e. individuals aged <40 years). More frequent BP checks (i.e. yearly) should be considered in individuals 40 years or older and individuals with elevated BP not currently meeting indications for treatment170 (Figure 10). 7.2 Confirming the diagnosis of
hypertension As noted in Section 5, assessment at a single visit by office BP has lower specificity compared with ABPM for diagnosing hypertension.70,238–241 Accordingly, a protocol for confirming the diagnosis of hypertension is proposed (Figure 10), with out-of-office BP measurement as the preferred method for confirming cases of elevated BP or hypertension. For initial screening systolic BP of >160 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of >100 mmHg, a prompt re-evaluation (within days to weeks but not >1 month) preferably with ABPM or HBPM is advisable.71 BP of >180/110 mmHg at screening requires exclusion of hypertensive emergencies, which should be managed as appropriate (see 242 and Section 10) with prompt treatment. For individuals with BP of >180/110 mmHg at screening but without hypertensive emergency, prompt confirmation (preferably within a week) can be considered prior to commencing treatment.
Recommendation Table 5 — Recommendations for blood pressure screening (see Evidence Table 15)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Opportunistic screening for elevated BP and hypertension should be considered at least every 3 years for adults aged <40 years.236,237 IIa C Opportunistic screening for elevated BP and hypertension should be considered at least annually for adults aged ≥40 years.231,237 IIa C In individuals with elevated BP who do not currently meet risk thresholds for BP-lowering treatment, a repeat BP measurement and risk assessment within 1 year should be considered. IIa C
Continued Other forms of screening for hypertension (i.e.
systematic screening, self-screening, and non-physician screening) may be considered, depending on their feasibility in different countries and healthcare systems.231–233 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 6 — Recommendations for confirming hypertension diagnosis
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In individuals with increased CVD risk where their screening office BP is 120–139/70–89 mmHg, it is recommended to measure BP out of office, using ABPM and/or HBPM or, if not logistically feasible, by making repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit.70,238–241 I B Where screening office BP is 140–159/90–99 mmHg, it is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be based on out-of-office BP measurement with ABPM and/or HBPM. If these measurements are not logistically or economically feasible, then diagnosis can be made on repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit.70,238–241 I B Where screening office BP is ≥160/100 mmHg: • It is recommended that BP 160–179/100–109
mmHg be confirmed as soon as possible (e.g. within 1 month) preferably by either home or ambulatory BP measurements; • It is recommended when BP ≥180/110 mmHg that
hypertensive emergency be excluded. I C © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure measurement; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HBPM, home blood pressure measurement. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3943
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.33
7.3 Communicating the diagnosis
Behavioural responses to health-related threats are strongly influenced by five core themes (termed ‘illness representations’), which are identity, timeline, cause, consequences, and control/cure.243,244 These illness representations form the basis of how patients understand a diagnosis, and can influence their responses after being diagnosed with hypertension.243 This conceptual framework can help guide the clinical communication of a diagnosis of hypertension. For example, patients’ understanding of the chronic nature of hypertension (i.e. timeline theme) is key for ensuring long-term engagement with medical treatment.245 Prior to commencing treatment, it is helpful to understand the extent to which patients believe that medications are necessary and ascertain if they have concerns.246 The core illness representations and beliefs about medicines for clinicians to consider are included in Table 7. The 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice recommend “an informed discussion about CVD risk and treatment benefits—tailored to the needs of a patient” as part of a diagnosis communication in hypertension.170 This can be facilitated using an interdisciplinary healthcare-provided approach (see Section 11) and by visual information or other more accessible material that might optimally communicate hypertension-related risk.128 Visualizing risk by medical imaging to motivate risk-reducing behaviour changes may also be beneficial.247
7.4 Baseline assessment and diagnostic
approach 7.4.1. Medical history, medication history, and physical examination The purpose of clinical evaluation is to diagnose hypertension, delineate factors potentially contributing to hypertension, identify other CVD risk factors, define relevant comorbidities, screen for potential secondary causes of hypertension (where indicated), and establish whether
N Y
N Y Screening for hypertension by office BP
High CVD risk conditions or SCORE2/SCORE2-OP ≥10% or SCORE2/SCORE2-OP 5% – <10%
+ risk modifiers
≥40 years?
Non-elevated BP
<120/70 mmHg Elevated BP 120–139/70–89 mmHg Hypertension 140–159/90–99 mmHg Hypertension 160–179/100–109 mmHg Hypertension
≥180/110
mmHg
Opportunistic BP screening at least every
3 years (Class IIa) Opportunistic
BP screening at least every year (Class IIa) Evaluate for hypertensive
emergency
(Class I)
Confirm BP preferably with either home or ambulatory
BP measurements
(Class I) Confirm BP promptly preferably with either
home or ambulatory
BP measurements
(Class I)
Figure 10 Protocol for confirming hypertension diagnosis. BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.34
there is evidence of HMOD or existing cardiac, cerebrovascular, or renal disease. Details on medical history and physical examination steps are summarized in the supplement (see Supplementary data online, Tables S2 and S3), as well as drugs or substances that may increase BP (see Supplementary data online, Table S4).
7.4.2 Drug adherence and persistence with
treatment Adherence is defined as the extent to which a patient’s behaviour, e.g. with respect to taking medication, coincides with agreed recommendations from a healthcare provider. Persistence represents the amount of time from initiation to discontinuation of therapy.248 Adherence to medical therapies is especially suboptimal in asymptomatic conditions such as hypertension.249–254 Non-adherence to BP-lowering therapy correlates with a higher risk of CVD events.255,256 Objective methods to assess adherence, such as detecting prescribed drugs in blood or urine samples and directly observed treatment (witnessed pill intake during ABPM), have demonstrated their potential usefulness, particularly in the setting of apparently resistant hypertension.257 However, all methods for testing drug adherence have limitations. Non-adherence to BP-lowering therapy depends on many factors (Figure 11).253 Effective patient–physician communication is crucial to improve adherence.258,259 Single-pill combinations improve persistence in BP-lowering treatment and are associated with lower all-cause mortality.260 7.4.3 Routine and optional tests
Routine tests include laboratory and clinical tests to detect increased CVD risk and relevant comorbidities (e.g. hyperlipidaemia and diabetes) (Table 8). Optional tests should be considered in the initial assessment if they are likely to change patient management, with the main rationale being to improve CVD risk stratification.170 As highlighted in Section 6, for adults with elevated BP who also have a 10-year estimated CVD risk of 5% to <10%, optional tests including those for HMOD may be considered if up-classification of risk on the basis of an abnormal test result could prompt initiation of BP-lowering therapy.31,170 Evidence of subclinical microvascular neurodegeneration and/or lacunar brain disease due to small-vessel pathology may also indicate HMOD.264
Table 7 Key illness representations and treatment beliefs: how these apply to communicating a hypertension diagnosis to the patient (note that gender influences these representations)
Illness representation Example patient question Application to a hypertension diagnosis conversation
Identity What is the disease/illness label and the related symptoms? The condition where your systolic BP is ≥140 and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg is called hypertension. We classify systolic BP 120–139 or diastolic
BP 70–89 mmHg as elevated BP. For most people, this has no noticeable signs or symptoms, therefore, we need to monitor your BP to assess how medications and behavioural changes are working.
Control Is the illness controllable through medical intervention or behavioural change? Hypertension can usually be controlled with medication and behavioural changes such as dietary changes and regular physical activity. For some people we need to try a few
different options before we get BP under control.
Timeline Is this an acute or chronic problem? This is a serious long-term or chronic condition condition that will require long-term
management. This means that it may need to be managed throughout life.
Consequences What are the physical and psychosocial
consequences? If hypertension is not controlled, then there is a risk of a serious acute cardiovascular
disease event such as a stroke or heart attack; however, if it is managed through the right medical intervention and behavioural changes, then this risk can be reduced and the condition will have less consequences for your life.
Causes What caused the condition? Multiple factors contribute to someone developing hypertension. These include both non-modifiable factors (e.g. genetics and age) and modifiable factors (e.g. diet, weight,
and physical activity). We are best focusing on those things that we can control to reduce your BP.
Treatment beliefs Example patient question Application to a hypertension diagnosis communication Necessity To what extent is treatment necessary? Taking BP-lowering medication every day is necessary to keep your BP under control and
to help prevent a more serious health problem developing. Do you think that these medicines will help you?
Concerns To what extent does treatment cause concern? Some patients have concerns about taking daily medications throughout their life, e.g. about side effects. Do you have any concerns about taking your BP medications every day? © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure.
Recommendation Table 7 — Recommendations for assessing adherence and persistence with treatment (see Evidence Table 16)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Objective evaluation of adherence (either directly observed treatment or detecting prescribed drugs in blood or urine samples) should be considered in the clinical work-up of patients with apparent resistant hypertension, if resources allow.261–263 IIa B © ESC 2024 aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3945
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.35
While the role of optional tests for HMOD (Table 9) in the management of elevated BP is emphasized in these guidelines, we also note that these tests may help to optimize treatment in hypertensive adults with BP of >140/90 mmHg who are prescribed BP-lowering therapy (e.g. by facilitating patient adherence and overcoming clinician inertia in achieving an intensive BP treatment target of as low as 120 mmHg systolic). The role of visualizing HMOD in helping motivate risk-reducing changes in patients and overcome physician inertia has been tested in interventional trials (Section 7.3).247,265–267
Non-adherence definition
Assessment
Intervention
Non-adherence definition
Assessments
Intervention
1
2
3 Patient does not initiate medication
Prescription fill data and self-report
Communicate benefits/safety of medication; alleviate fear of side effects/harm; discuss practicalities
Patient does not take medication as prescribed
Prescription refill data; self-report; electronic monitoring; chemical adherence testing (blood/urine)
Reminders; encourage habit formation; simplify drug regimen
Patient discontinues medication
Prescription refill data; self-report; electronic monitoring; chemical adherence testing (blood/urine) Motivational counseling on benefits/safety of medication; discuss side effects; medication reconciliation; review practical aspects (cost and ease of access to medication)
Non-adherence definition
Assessment
Intervention
Initiation
Implementation
Persistence
Figure 11 Definitions, assessments, and potential interventions for the three phases of adherence to BP-lowering medications.
Table 8 Routine tests recommended in the initial work-up of a patient with elevated blood pressure or hypertension
Routine test Clinical utility
Fasting blood glucose (and HbA1c if fasting blood glucose is elevated) Assessing CVD risk and comorbidities Serum lipids: total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL and non-HDL cholesterol, triglycerides Assessing CVD risk Blood sodium and potassium, haemoglobin and/or haematocrit, calcium, and TSH Screening secondary hypertension (primary aldosteronism, Cushing’s disease, polycythaemia, hyperparathyroidism, and hyperthyroidism) Blood creatinine and eGFR; urinalysis and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio Assessing CVD risk and HMOD Guiding treatment choice
Screening secondary hypertension (renoparenchymal and renovascular)
12-lead ECG Assessing HMOD (left atrial enlargement, left ventricular hypertrophy)
Assessing irregular pulse and other comorbidities (AF, previous acute myocardial infarction) © ESC 2024
AF, atrial fibrillation; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.36
HMOD assessment is also an important way to identify young adults <40 years old who have increased CVD risk, since 10-year estimated CVD risk by SCORE2 cannot be calculated in this age group (see Section 8.1). More details on diagnostic thresholds for HMOD by the various assessment options, including important sex differences, are provided in Supplementary data online, Tables S1 and S5 and Figure 12. Finally, some individuals may be at heightened risk for CVD events when cardiac and vascular HMOD measurements like LVH and increased PWV do not regress over time with appropriate treatment and BP control.14,268–271 Investigations aimed at screening for secondary hypertension are additional optional tests and are detailed in Section 7.6. Of note, patients with an incidental adrenal nodule or nodules (typically detected on imaging of the abdomen done for other clinical reasons) warrant screening for elevated BP and hypertension. Those with adrenal incidentalomas and hypertension warrant a basic work-up for secondary hypertension to include screening for primary aldosteronism, Cushing’s syndrome and phaeochromocytoma.
7.4.3.1 The kidneys
CKD is defined as abnormalities of kidney structure or function, present for at least 3 months with implications for health.272 Renal function is evaluated initially using serum creatinine and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation (preferably race-free CKD-EPI) and typically for proteinuria.273 Our definition of moderate-to-severe CKD requires an eGFR of <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or albuminuria of ≥30 mg/g (≥3 mg/mmol). Intensive BP control in patients with CKD reduces rates of CVD events.274,275 CKD can influence the choice of BP-lowering treatment (Sections 8 and 9), as well as newer drugs for cardiovascular prevention, such as sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and finerenone.
We recommend repeat measurement of eGFR and urine albumin: creatinine ratio (ACR) at least annually if clinically significant CKD is diagnosed. Renal ultrasound and Doppler examination to evaluate causes of CKD and to exclude renoparenchymal and renovascular hypertension (RVH) should also be considered.276,277
7.4.3.2 The heart
A 12-lead ECG is a part of the initial routine work-up for all patients with hypertension and should be repeated whenever patients present with an irregular pulse or cardiac symptoms. The ECG should be analysed for LVH (Supplementary data online, Table S1) and AF.31,278–282 Echocardiography is recommended in patients with hypertension when the ECG is abnormal, murmurs are detected, or there are cardiac symptoms. A full, standardized, two-dimensional echocardiogram should be performed, preferably with tissue Doppler and strain assessment. Echocardiography can be considered for all patients with newly diagnosed hypertension, if local resources and reimbursement policies allow. Over 5 years of follow-up, subclinical left ventricular diastolic dysfunction predicts the incidence of CVD.283–285 In addition, LVH detected by echocardiography predicts total and cardiovascular mortality and CVD events in the general population,286,287 including in young adults.26,268,288,289 Data on the associations with CVD of other metrics for detecting HMOD in the heart are also available.26,268,290 Since cardiac size and function differ by sex, sex-specific thresholds for detecting HMOD in the heart are used to avoid under-diagnosis in women.25,174,291
Table 9 Optional tests that may be used as clinically indicated in the initial work-up of a patient with elevated blood pressure or hypertension to assess hypertension-mediated organ damage or established cardiovascular disease
Optional test Clinical utility
Echocardiography Assessing HMOD (hypertensive heart
disease) Assessing established CVD (previous acute myocardial infarction, heart failure) Assessing thoracic aorta dilation
CAC by cardiac CT or carotid or femoral artery ultrasound imaging Assessing HMOD (atherosclerotic plaque) Large artery stiffness (carotid– femoral or brachial–ankle PWV) Assessing HMOD (arterial stiffness) High-sensitivity cardiac troponin and/or NT-proBNP Assessing HMOD Ankle–brachial index Assessing established CVD
(lower-extremity arterial disease)
Abdominal ultrasound Assessing established CVD
(abdominal aneurysm)
Fundoscopy Assessing HMOD (hypertensive
retinopathy) Diagnosing hypertensive emergency/ malignant hypertension (haemorrhages and exudates, papilloedema) © ESC 2024
CAC, coronary artery calcium; CT, computed tomography; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide; PWV, pulse wave velocity. Recommendation Table 8 — Recommendations for assessing renal hypertension-mediated organ damage
Recommendation Classa Levelb
It is recommended to measure serum creatinine, eGFR, and urine ACR in all patients with hypertension.170,273 I A If moderate-to-severe CKD is diagnosed, it is recommended to repeat measurements of serum creatinine, eGFR, and urine ACR at least annually.276 I C Renal ultrasound and Doppler examination should be considered in hypertensive patients with CKD to assess kidney structure and determine causes of CKD and to exclude renoparenchymal and renovascular hypertension.276,277 CT or magnetic resonance renal angiography are alternative testing options. IIa C © ESC 2024
ACR, albumin:creatinine ratio; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CT, computed tomography; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 9 — Recommendations for assessing cardiac hypertension-mediated organ damage
Recommendation Classa Levelb
A 12-lead ECG is recommended for all patients with hypertension.31,281 I B
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3947
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.37
7.4.3.3 The arteries
Cardiac computed tomography (CT) may be used to measure CAC and, if intravascular contrast is administered, fully visualize coronary artery disease to improve risk stratification.211,293 As noted in Section 6, CAC scoring can reclassify CVD risk upwards or downwards in addition to conventional risk factors.127,170,211,233,294 Carotid ultrasound detects presence or absence of carotid plaque (wall thickness ≥ 1.5 mm) and stenosis. Presence of plaque in the carotid or femoral arteries improves risk prediction for CVD events in asymptomatic patients on top of conventional risk-factor assessment.211,247,265,267,295,296 Systematic use of intima media thickness does not appear to consistently improve prediction of future CVD events.297 Arterial stiffness is measured as carotid–femoral PWV or brachial–ankle PWV, and can contribute to predictive value and risk reclassification.28,31,215,216 PWV is currently used mostly for research purposes or in specialist referral centres. Checking for inter-arm BP difference may identify a subclavian stenosis as vascular HMOD.38 Other tests assessing the vasculature [such as abdominal ultrasound or ankle–brachial index (ABI)] should also be considered in patients with hypertension, when specific cardiovascular complications (abdominal aneurysm, peripheral artery disease) are clinically suspected. Finally, microvascular HMOD can be assessed by fundoscopy. A simplified classification has been proposed and validated.298 In hypertensive individuals, the presence of mild or moderate hypertensive retinopathy is associated with an increased risk of CVD events.299 Fundoscopy is recommended also in hypertensive diabetic patients and in the work-up of malignant hypertension and hypertensive emergencies. 7.4.4 Genetic testing
Hypertension is considered a complex polygenic disorder, because many genes or gene combinations influence BP.300,301 However, some well-defined phenotypes relating to single-gene mutations (i.e. monogenic forms of hypertension) have been identified (see Supplementary data online, Table S6). These are rare, but knowledge of the genetic defect may allow targeted treatment of the proband and also proper management of the patient’s siblings.302,303 As such, genetic testing should be considered only for those with a high prior probability of having a monogenic condition and such patients should be referred to specialized centres. In most patients with elevated BP or hypertension, routine genetic testing is not recommended. Family history and a pedigree analysis can help to find a heritable pattern of hypertension or hypotension.304
7.5 Resistant hypertension: definition and
diagnosis Despite availability and use of multiple BP-lowering medications, many patients worldwide have uncontrolled hypertension.306–308 Considering this, societies have introduced the term ‘drug-resistant hypertension’, or ‘treatment-resistant hypertension’, or ‘resistant hypertension’,309 which has been reported in 10%–20% of patients with hypertension.310,311 Resistant hypertension is not a disease per se. Compared with treated patients who achieve BP control, patients with resistant hypertension (by any definition) have a worse prognosis: risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, end-stage renal disease, and death in these adults may be two- to six-fold higher.309 Secondary causes of hypertension are also more likely in the presence of resistant hypertension.312 All resistant hypertension definitions require a diuretic in the prescribed multiple-drug regimen, because excess salt intake and salt and water retention are key players in resistance to BP-lowering treatments (Table 10).309
Echocardiography is recommended in patients with hypertension and ECG abnormalities, or signs or symptoms of cardiac disease.14,31,292 I B Echocardiography may be considered in patients with elevated BP, particularly when it is likely to change patient management.31,291 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; ECG, electrocardiogram. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 10 — Recommendations for assessing vascular hypertension-mediated organ damage (see Evidence Table 17)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Fundoscopy is recommended if BP >180/110 mmHg in the work-up of hypertensive emergency and malignant hypertension, as well as in hypertensive patients with diabetes. I C Fundoscopy for detecting hypertensive retinopathy may be considered in patients with elevated BP or hypertension.299 IIb B Ultrasound examination of the carotid or femoral arteries for detecting plaque may be considered in patients with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management.211 IIb B
Continued Coronary artery calcium scoring may be considered
in patients with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management.127,211 IIb B Measurement of PWV may be considered in patients with elevated BP or hypertension when it is likely to change patient management.28,31,215,216 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; PWV, pulse wave velocity. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of recommendation.
Recommendation Table 11 — Recommendations for genetic testing in hypertension management
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Genetic testing should be considered in specialist centres for patients suspected to have rare monogenic causes of secondary hypertension or for those with phaeochromocytoma/ paraganglioma.302,305 IIa B Routine genetic testing for hypertension is not recommended. III C © ESC 2024 aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.38
Coronary artery calcium score >100 Agatston units
Carotid-femoral PWV >10 m/s Brachial-ankle PWV >14 m/s
Plaque (focal wall thickening >1.5 mm)
Cornell voltage: SV3+RaVL>28 mm (men)
SV3+RaVL>20 mm (women)
RaVL ≥11 mm Sokolow–Lyon: SV1+RV5 >35 mm
Cardiac CT
Pulse wave velocity
Carotid or femoral ultrasound
Cardiac biomarkers
Echocardiography
ECG
eGFR ACR Moderate-to-severe kidney disease
LVH
LVH
Diastolic dysfunction
LV mass/height2.7(g/m2.7): >50 (men) >47 (women) LV mass/BSA(g/m2): >115 (men) >95 (women) RWT ≥0.43 LV concentric geometry:
LA volume/height2 (mL/m2): >18.5 (men)
>16.5 (women)
LA volume index (mL/m2): 34 e’ <7cm; E/e’ >14
hs-cTnT or I >99th percentile upper reference limit NT-proBNP >125 pg/mL if age <75 years or >450 pg/mL if ≥75 years
eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 irrespective of albuminuria Albuminuria ≥30 mg/g irrespective of eGFR
Assistance overcoming patient and physician inertia
Individuals <40 years old with elevated blood pressure
Uncertain situations (i.e. BP or risk close to thresholds, masked or white-coat hypertension, non-traditional CVD risk factors)
Individuals with elevated BP with SCORE2/SCORE2-OP risk of 5–<10%
Support decision to start or intensify BPlowering treatment for:
Why measure? How to diagnose HMOD? What to measure? Which organ?
Kidney
Heart
Arteries
Figure 12 Tests and criteria for defining hypertension-mediated organ damage and considerations for their use in clinical practice. ACR, albumin: creatinine ratio; BP, blood pressure; BSA, body surface area; CT, computed tomography; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; hs-cTnT, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T; LA, left atrial; LV, left ventricular; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide; PWV, pulse wave velocity; RWT, relative wall thickness; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons. More details and references can be found in the Supplementary data online, Tables S1 and S5.
ESC Guidelines 3949
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.39
In addition, excluding pseudo-resistance is a prerequisite. Specifically, pseudo-resistance indicates poor adherence to BP-lowering treatment, which should be verified by careful questioning of the patient in the first instance (Section 7.4.3).257 In addition, white-coat hypertension must be excluded.263 Contributors to pseudo-resistance are listed in Table 11. Objective evaluation of adherence (either directly observed treatment or detecting prescribed drugs in blood or urine samples) should also be considered, if resources allow. The work-up of patients presumed to have resistant hypertension is complex and often requires technologies that are not available to GPs.257,309 Accordingly, we recommend these patients are referred to specialized centres.
7.6 Secondary hypertension: when to
screen/further investigations 7.6.1. General considerations Secondary hypertension is more prevalent than previously thought (Figures 13–15).312–317 Depending on the definition used and the cohort studied, the prevalence of secondary hypertension is 10%–35% in all hypertensive patients318,319 and up to 50% of patients with resistant hypertension (though the latter prevalence estimate included persons with eGFR < 40 mL/min/1.73 m2).312 Primary aldosteronism is a common cause,315,320 with, e.g. a high prevalence of hyperaldosteronism (up to 12%) observed in patients with BP of >180/110 mmHg.316
Despite these numbers, screening rates for primary aldosteronism, even in high-risk groups such as those with resistant hypertension321 and hypokalaemia,322 are low (around 2% and 4% of eligible patients, respectively). In most healthcare systems, GPs are typically the ‘gatekeeper’ of access to specialized care and should be involved in screening patients for common causes of secondary hypertension, especially sleep apnoea and primary aldosteronism (Supplementary data online, Tables S2 and S3). Primary aldosteronism is associated with an increased risk of CVD events, which may be partly independent of BP.323,324
7.6.2 Primary aldosteronism
Though spontaneous or diuretic-induced hypokalaemia are strongly suggestive of primary aldosteronism, a history of hypokalaemia is not present in most patients diagnosed with this condition. The aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) is thus recommended for primary aldosteronism screening (see Figure 13).325 This test can easily be done in treatment-naïve patients, though it is far more common for the ARR test to be considered when patients are already being treated for elevated BP or hypertension. This is relevant because ARR can be influenced by the drugs being taken at the time of testing. Accordingly, there are 2 approaches to screen for aldosteronism among patients who are already undergoing treatment for elevated BP or hypertension: • The first is to conduct ARR testing in treated patients with an indication for aldosteronism screening as efficiently as possible and without changing or stopping their baseline BP-lowering medications, simply to facilitate such testing. The ARR result then needs to be interpreted in the context of the specific medication(s) the patient is taking. Advantages of this approach include reducing barriers to screening and no change in medication in these patients, many of whom do not have BP controlled and in whom further deterioration in their BP control by stopping or changing medication may increase risk of CVD. Disadvantages include the interpretation of the ARR result, which depends on the specific medications taken at the time of testing.326 Input from a hypertension specialist or endocrinologist may be necessary.
Recommendation Table 12 — Recommendations for resistant hypertension work-up (see Evidence Table 18)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Patients with resistant hypertension should be considered for referral to clinical centres with expertise in hypertension management for further testing.309,312 IIa B © ESC 2024 aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Table 10 Current definition of resistant hypertension
Definition of resistant hypertension
Hypertension is defined as resistant when a treatment strategy including appropriate lifestyle measures and treatment with maximum or maximally tolerated doses of a diuretic (thiazide or thiazide-like), a RAS blocker, and a calcium channel blocker fail to lower office systolic and diastolic BP values to <140 mmHg and/or <90 mmHg, respectively. These uncontrolled BP values must be confirmed by out-of-office BP measurements (HBPM or ABPM— Section 5.1 for relevant BP thresholds). Key considerations • Resistant hypertension is not a disease, but an indicator that should be
used to identify patients at high risk for CVD, in which secondary hypertension is also frequent; • Pseudo-resistant hypertension must be excluded, including that caused by
non-adherence to treatment; • In patients with decreased eGFR (i.e. <30 mL/min/1.73 m2) an adequately up-titrated loop diuretic is necessary to define resistant hypertension; • Patients with suspected resistant hypertension should be referred to specialized centres; • These ESC Guidelines do not include the terms ‘controlled resistant
hypertension’ (BP at target but requiring ≥4 medications) or ‘refractory hypertension’ (BP not at target despite ≥5 medications). © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; RAS, renin–angiotensin system. Table 11 Conditions found to cause pseudo-resistance or resistance to blood pressure-lowering treatment
Causes of pseudo-resistant hypertension Poor adherence to and persistence with treatment White-coat phenomenon Poor BP measurement method Marked brachial artery calcification (Osler phenomenon) Clinician inertia (inadequate doses, inappropriate combinations of BP-lowering drugs) Munchausen syndrome (rare) Causes of resistant hypertension Behavioural factors Overweight/obesity Physical inactivity Excess daily dietary sodium Excess habitual alcohol consumption Use of drugs or substances that may increase BP See Supplementary data online, Table S4 Undetected secondary hypertension See Table 13 © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.40
• To reliably estimate renin and aldosterone status (and therefore ARR), and to facilitate a ‘clean’ screen for aldosteronism, a second approach is to discontinue drugs that affect these variables whenever feasible before ARR testing (Table 12). Such interfering drugs include, beta-blockers, centrally acting drugs (e.g., clonidine and alpha-methyldopa) renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers and diuretics.326 Long-acting calcium channel blockers (CCBs), either dihydropyridine or non-dihydropyridine, and alpha-receptor antagonists do not interfere with the ARR and can be used instead of interfering medications before ARR testing. Should drugs that do not interfere with the ARR be contraindicated or insufficient to control BP, centrally acting sympatholytic drugs can also then be used, but at the risk of slightly more false positives (by renin suppression). Furthermore, when mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) cannot be stopped for safety reasons (i.e. severe hypokalaemia or severe hypertension among patients with severe hyperaldosteronism), recent evidence suggests that the accuracy of ARR testing under this treatment is only marginally impacted, particularly in the presence of florid primary aldosteronism.327
Assessing sodium intake (preferably 24 h urinary sodium, or sodiumto-creatinine ratio in the morning urine sample) is also important for interpreting the ARR, as is time in menstrual cycle for females. ARR cut-offs vary depending on unit of measurement and by local laboratory. For detailed information, readers are referred to the latest primary aldosteronism guidelines.328,329
7.6.3 Renovascular hypertension
Renovascular hypertension (RVH) defines a condition where renal artery occlusion or stenosis decreases renal perfusion pressure to a level that activates the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS), thereby raising BP. Major causes are atherosclerosis and fibromuscular dysplasia (Figure 14 and Supplementary data online, Tables S1 and S2). Atherosclerosis is the most common form of RVH, especially in older adults.318 Fibromuscular dysplasia is a systemic non-atherosclerotic vascular disease involving medium-sized muscular arteries. When renal arteries are involved, fibromuscular dysplasia may induce RVH (FMD-RVH), especially in children and younger women.330–332
Though not highly sensitive, very elevated renin levels raise the suspicion for RVH. The work-up of RVH (Table 13) is based on imaging tests, such as renal artery Doppler ultrasound, with bilateral assessment of renal arterial resistive index, or abdominal CT angiography, or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in line with current ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial diseases,277 which will be updated in 2024. Of note, bystander renal artery stenosis may be present in patients with essential hypertension, without causing secondary hypertension due to RVH. Since fibromuscular dysplasia is a systemic disease, CT or MRI angiography from head to pelvis is recommended in patients with FMD-RVH.277,332
7.6.4 Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome
Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) is prevalent in hypertension and particularly in resistant hypertension, with studies indicating that up to 60% of patients with resistant hypertension have features of OSAS.314 OSAS should be suspected in patients with hypertension and suggestive symptoms (see Supplementary data online, Table S2), in all patients with resistant hypertension, and in patients with nondipping or reverse-dipping pattern at 24 h BP monitoring, especially if obese (Figure 15). Using validated questionnaires may help identify patients at high risk of OSAS.333 Lack of suggestive symptoms does not rule out OSAS. A simplified polysomnogram confirms the diagnosis [apnoea–hypopnoea index (AHI) > 5] and can quantify the severity of OSAS (mild: AHI < 15; moderate: AHI of 15–30; severe: AHI > 30).334
Table 12 Drugs and conditions that affect aldosterone, renin, and aldosterone-to-renin ratio
Factor Effect on plasma aldosterone levels Effect on renin levels Effect on ARR
Serum potassium status Hypokalaemia ↓ →↑ ↓ (FN) Potassium loading ↑ →↓ ↑ Sodium restriction ↑ ↑↑ ↓ (FN) Sodium loading ↓ ↓↓ ↑ (FP) Drugs Beta-adrenergic blockers ↓ ↓↓ ↑ (FP) Calcium channel blockers (DHPs) →↓ →↑ →↓ (FN with short-acting DHPs) ACE inhibitors ↓ ↑↑ ↓ (FN) ARBs ↓ ↑↑ ↓ (FN) Potassium-sparing diuretics ↑ ↑↑ ↓ (FN) Potassium-wasting diuretics →↑ ↑↑ ↓ (FN) Alpha-2 agonists (clonidine, methyldopa) ↓ ↓↓ ↑ (FP) NSAIDs ↓ ↓↓ ↑ (FP) Steroids ↓ →↓ ↑ (FP) Contraceptive agents (drospirenone) ↑ ↑ ↑ (FP) © ESC 2024
↑, raised; ↓, lowered; →, no effect; ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; ARR, aldosterone-to-renin ratio; DHPs, dihydropyridines; FN, false negative; FP, false positive; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.
ESC Guidelines 3951
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.41
Primary aldosteronism
Mostly asymptomatic
Spontaneous or diureticprovoked hypokalaemia
AF Disproportionate HMOD
Muscle weakness and tetany
Family history of primary aldosteronism, early onset hypertension and/or stroke
Adrenal incidentaloma
Signs and symptoms Diagnosis
Pathophysiology
Treatment
Aldosterone-renin ratio (ARR) Confirmatory tests (e.g. saline suppression test) Adrenal vein sampling or functional imaging Genetic testing
Aldosterone-producing adenoma
Familial forms due to germline mutations
Bilateral hyperplasia
Medical: mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists Surgical: unilateral adrenalectomy
Figure 13 Summary of primary aldosteronism as a common form of secondary hypertension. AF, atrial fibrillation; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage.
Table 13 Optional tests that should be used to screen for secondary hypertension in the presence of suggestive signs, symptoms, or medical history
Cause of secondary hypertension Screening test
Primary aldosteronism Aldosterone-to-renin ratio Helpful information can also be provided by reviewing prior potassium levels (hypokalaemia increases the likelihood of
coexistent primary hyperaldosteronism)
Renovascular hypertension Renal doppler ultrasound
Abdominal CT angiogram or MRI
Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma 24 h urinary and/or plasma metanephrine and normetanephrine Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome Overnight ambulatory polysomnography Renal parenchymal disease Plasma creatinine, sodium, and potassium
eGFR Urine dipstick for blood and protein Urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio Renal ultrasound
Cushing’s syndrome 24 h urinary free cortisol
Low-dose dexamethasone suppression test
Thyroid disease (hyper- or hypothyroidism) TSH Hyperparathyroidism Parathyroid hormone
Calcium and phosphate
Coarctation of the aorta Echocardiogram
Aortic CT angiogram © ESC 2024
CT, computed tomography; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.42
Restless/intermittent sleep, recurrent awakenings daytime sleepiness, fatigue, impaired concentration
Increased neck circumference
Apnoea, snoring
Obesity
Signs and symptoms
Atrial fibrillation Non-dipping or reverse dipping pattern 24 h ABPM Obstructive sleep apnoea Pathophysiology
Intermittent upper airway obstruction during sleep
Overnight ambulatory polysomnography
Diagnosis
Treatment
Weight loss CPAP Mandibular advancement devices
Figure 15 Summary of obstructive sleep apnoea as a common form of secondary hypertension. AF, atrial fibrillation; ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitor; CPAP, continuous positive airway pressure.
Renovascular hypertension
Migraine, pulsatile tinnitus (FMD)
Pulmonary oedema (bilateral)
Multisite atherosclerosis
Unexplained small kidney or kidney asymmetry
Age <40 years (FMD)
Signs and symptoms Pathophysiology
Diagnosis
Treatment
Significant renal artery stenosis:
Atherosclerosis Fibromuscular dysplasia Rare causes
Renal doppler ultrasound Abdominal CT-Angio or MRI
Vascular bruits Arterial dissections and/or aneurysms (FMD)
Medical: optimal CV risk management Interventional: renal angioplasty without (FMD) or with stenting (atherosclerosis)
Acute eGFR after RAS blocker
GFR, albuminuria, renin
Age >60 years with acute change in BP or flash pulmonary oedema (atherosclerosis)
Figure 14 Summary of renovascular disease as a common form of secondary hypertension. CT-Angio, computed tomography angiography; CV, cardiovascular; FMD, fibromuscular dysplasia; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; RAS, renin–angiotensin system.
ESC Guidelines 3953
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.43
7.6.5 Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma
Phaeochromocytomas/paragangliomas (PPGLs) are a rare form of secondary hypertension characterized by a highly heterogeneous clinical presentation.335,336 PPGLs are usually discovered incidentally.337 A PPGL should be suspected in the presence of signs and symptoms of catecholamine excess or in syndromic PPGL, in patients with a family history of PPGL, and in carriers of a germline mutation in one of the PPGL-causing genes.338 Since normetanephrine and metanephrine are secreted constitutively, as opposed to the highly variable nature of catecholamine secretion, they are preferred as screening tests for PPGL (Table 13).
8 Preventing and treating elevated
blood pressure and hypertension
The ultimate goal of preventing and treating elevated BP and hypertension is to reduce CVD, to improve quality of life, and to prevent premature death. Crucially, besides BP, other CVD risk factors need to be comprehensively addressed (e.g. smoking, glucose, dyslipidaemia) as detailed in the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice.170 Indeed, it is worth emphasizing that, when combined, these CVD risk factors have multiplicative (not additive) effects on CVD risk.340
8.1 Prevention strategies in early life
Detailed information on this topic is provided in the Supplementary data online. High BP tracks from childhood to adulthood.341,342 Hypertension in childhood was redefined in a 2022 ESC Consensus Document.343 8.2 Non-pharmacological interventions
A major underlying contributor to elevated BP and hypertension in the general adult population is unhealthy lifestyle, with severe consequences for all-cause and CVD mortality. As such, we give lifestyle interventions to reduce BP a special status in our recommendations throughout these guidelines (Figures 16 and 17). This is reflected by a modified approach to the class of recommendations for lifestyle interventions compared with medical interventions (pharmacological or procedural). Given the salutary benefits of healthy lifestyle on a range of outcomes that extend well beyond BP-lowering effects,347 including broad mental and physical health benefits, we do not require lifestyle interventions to have RCT evidence for efficacy in reducing CVD events through BP lowering to achieve a Class I recommendation. In deciding to give lifestyle interventions this status, the task force also recognizes that: (i) lifestyle interventions are less likely to be subjected to clinical outcomes trials (e.g. due to funding limitations and lack of interest from industry), and (ii) the risks of adverse effects and toxicity relating to healthy lifestyle interventions are low. In contrast, in these guidelines, to achieve a Class I recommendation (irrespective of level of evidence) there needs to be evidence that medical interventions that reduce BP also decrease CVD events by BP lowering.
8.2.1 Dietary sodium and potassium intake
8.2.1.1. Sodium Reducing dietary salt (sodium chloride) intake in individuals with high baseline intake lowers CVD event rates.348 Extensive observational studies have reported dose–response associations between high dietary sodium intake and CVD events.349–351 The potential impact of salt reduction on population health is significant, particularly in countries where the population’s average salt intake is high. Pooled data from longterm follow-up salt-reduction trials demonstrate that reducing salt by 2.5 g/day is associated with an approximately 20% reduction in CVD events at the population level.349 The health benefits of salt reduction are likely mediated, largely, by BP-lowering effects.352–354 An almost linear relationship has been described in a dose–response meta-analysis between sodium intake ranging from 0.4 to 7.6 g/day and reduction of systolic and diastolic BP is independent of baseline BP.355,356 Women appear to be, on average, more sodium sensitive than men,357 and may have greater outcome benefits when receiving comparable sodium-restricted diets.358 Trial evidence for the BP-lowering benefits of salt reduction extend down to daily sodium intakes of <1.5 g/day.356,358–361 The task force acknowledges that the observational data linking sodium intake to CVD outcomes are mixed and that some studies have not found a link between salt intake and CVD.362,363 In addition, a potential J-curve exists between sodium intake and CVD events (whereby some analyses suggest that sodium reduction to very low levels could be harmful).363,364 While there are differences of opinion, the task force agreed that, on balance, (i) observational J-curve data are often due to reverse causality or confounding,114,348,365,366 (ii) the relationship between dietary sodium and stroke is typically linear in shape, without any J-curve, (iii) if the J-curve were causal, the adverse effect of very low sodium on CVD would have to be mediated by some harmful mechanism that overcomes the expected benefit mediated by BP lowering (which is unlikely), and (iv) estimation of sodium intake using spot-urine sodium testing (which was commonly done in studies reporting a J-curve) may not be as valid as other methods.367 For example, most (but not all)362 reports measuring 24 h urine sodium excretion (a surrogate measure of sodium intake) have not reported a J-curve association with CVD.350,364 Furthermore the causal evidence demonstrating reduced CVD with sodium restriction (using potassiumenriched salt substitutes) in the Salt Substitute and Stroke Study (SSaSS)
Recommendation Table 13 — Recommendations for screening for secondary hypertension (see Evidence Tables 19 and 20)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
It is recommended that patients with hypertension presenting with suggestive signs, symptoms or medical history of secondary hypertension are appropriately screened for secondary hypertension.312,314,315,323,339 I B Screening for primary aldosteronism by renin and aldosterone measurements should be considered in all adults with confirmed hypertension (BP ≥140/90 mmHg).313,316,323,339 IIa B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 14 — Recommendations for screening for hypertension in children and adolescents (see Evidence Table 21)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Opportunistic screening with office BP measurements to monitor development of BP during late childhood and adolescence, especially if one or both parents have hypertension, should be considered to better predict development of adult hypertension and associated CVD risk.344–346 IIa B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.44
and Diet, ExerCIse and carDiovascular hEalth-Salt (DECIDE-Salt) trials was compelling,348,368 even though sodium restriction in these trials was not below 2 g/day. It is recommended to restrict total dietary sodium intake to approximately 2 g/day or less (equivalent to approximately 5 g or about a teaspoon of salt per day). This includes added salt and salt already contained in food. While the feasibility of this sodium target can be debated, the evidence for the benefits of this sodium target among patients with elevated BP or hypertension is sufficient, particularly in terms of lowering BP. The optimal sodium intake in the general population with non-elevated BP is less clear (noting also that the BP-lowering effect of salt reduction among patients with non-elevated BP appears lower).353,354 A more feasible compromise in the general population might be a target sodium intake range of 2– 4 g/day.369,370 It needs to be emphasized that large parts of daily sodium intake occur by means of sodium consumption contained in processed foods. 8.2.1.2 Potassium
Optimal dietary potassium intake, e.g. by consuming diets rich in fruits and vegetables, has BP-lowering effects and may be associated with lower CVD risk.348,364,368,371–373 The association between potassium intake, systolic BP, and CVD events may be sex-specific, being stronger in women.374 The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends over 3.5 g/day (∼90 mmol/day) of dietary potassium.375 Excessive potassium supplementation should, however, be avoided374 and CKD guidelines recommend dietary potassium restriction to <2.4 g/day in persons with advanced CKD (see Supplementary data online).376 A lower urinary sodium-to-potassium ratio (Na+/K+ ratio; a surrogate for reduced dietary sodium intake complemented by increased potassium intake) has been associated with a greater reduction in systolic and diastolic BP than with a higher ratio.348,377 In patients with hypertension and high dietary sodium, increased dietary intake of potassium (in addition to lower dietary sodium) should be considered.348,350,378 In patients with persistently high sodium intake (>5 g/day)
Aerobic exercise training At least 150 min/week moderateintensity or 75 min/week vigorous intensity: brisk walking, jogging, cycling, swimming (Class I)
Isometric resistance exercise training: Low-to-moderate-intensity (3 sets of 1–2 min contraction: hand-grip, plank, wall sit)
Dynamic resistance exercise training: Large muscle groups, low-tomoderate-intensity (2–3 sets with 10–15 reps.: squat, push-ups, sit-up)
Increase daily physical activity (steps/day, take stairs, walk/cycle)
Avoid sedentary lifestyle
BP Reduction CV Risk Reduction
Dynamic or isometric resistance training to
complement aerobic exercise training
2–3 times/week (Class I)
Figure 16 Physical activity according to different types of exercise and reduction of blood pressure and overall cardiovascular disease risk. Priority is given to aerobic exercise training (green). BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease.
ESC Guidelines 3955
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.45
and without moderate-to-advanced CKD, particularly women, an increase in potassium intake by 0.5–1.0 g/day may be considered to achieve a favourable Na+/K+ ratio of 1.5–2.0 and to reduce CVD risk. Potassium supplementation can be achieved by substituting sodium using potassium enriched salts (75% sodium chloride and 25% potassium chloride)368,379,380 or by increasing dietary potassium intake [e.g. a 125 g (medium) banana contains about 450 mg potassium, or unsalted boiled spinach (840 mg/ cup) or mashed avocado (710 mg/cup)]. In patients with CKD and/or those taking potassium-sparing medication, such as some diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or spironolactone, serum levels of potassium should be monitored (noting that phlebotomy recommendations to avoid spuriously high potassium results should be followed). 8.2.2 Physical activity and exercise
In a systematic review and meta-analyses, aerobic (endurance) exercise was suggested as the first-line exercise therapy for reducing BP in patients with elevated BP and hypertension vs. alternative forms of exercise, such as dynamic or isometric resistance training.381 In patients with hypertension, regular aerobic exercise substantially lowers systolic BP by up to 7–8 mmHg and diastolic BP by up to 4–5 mmHg.381,382 For nonwhite patients with hypertension, dynamic resistance training elicits BP reductions that appear comparable to aerobic exercise.383 Isometric resistance training also achieves clinically relevant BP reductions in patients with hypertension, but results are inconsistent and more data from more high-quality intervention trials are required (see Supplementary data online).381,384,385 With respect to mode and intensity of aerobic exercise,
Increase physical activity
Increase potassium intake
Optimize weight management and diet
No smoking
Reduce alcohol intake
Reduce table salt (sodium chloride) intake BP Reduction CV Risk Reduction
Figure 17 Effects of main lifestyle factors on blood pressure and cardiovascular risk reduction. BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular. Smoking cessation reduces overall cardiovascular risk but not BP (long arrow). Salt reduction reduces BP and (for persons with high baseline intake) reduces cardiovascular risk. Increased potassium intake and higher physical activity, as well as optimized weight management, reduce BP and are associated with lower overall cardiovascular risk (short arrows). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.46
high-intensity interval training elicits comparable BP reductions to moderate continuous exercise, with high-intensity interval training achieving greater improvement in physical fitness.386 In patients with known hypertension, engaging in physical activity is associated with reduced CVD mortality risk vs. sedentary patients with hypertension.387 An exaggerated BP response to exercise may yield diagnostic merits for predicting incident hypertension and CVD. In a meta-analysis, an exaggerated BP response to exercise was associated with an increased risk for masked hypertension.388 The risk of coronary heart disease also increases with higher systolic BP during exercise, independent of systolic BP at rest.389 Prior recommendations for at least 150 min/week of moderate intensity aerobic exercise (≥30 min, 5–7 days/week) can be maintained.1,390 Alternatively, 75 min of vigorous-intensity exercise per week over 3 days may be performed, with additional benefits derived by achieving 300 min of moderate-intensity or 150 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity per week.390,391 As acute aerobic exercise induces intensitydependent short-term reductions in ambulatory BP after exercise, patients with elevated BP and hypertension may benefit from daily exercise to improve their 24 h BP profile and avoid BP peaks on sedentary days.392 Aerobic exercise should be complemented by low- or moderate-intensity resistance training (2–3 times per week), e.g. dynamic resistance, starting at 2–3 sets of 10–15 repetitions at 40%–60% of one-repetition maximum393 or isometric resistance training with three sets of 1–2 min contractions, such as hand-grip, plank, or wall sit (Figure 16).381,394 In uncontrolled hypertension at rest, high-intensity exercise should be applied with caution, with resting systolic BP of >200 mmHg and diastolic BP of >110 mmHg indicating relative contraindications.395 Age, sex, gender,396 ethnicity, and comorbidities, as well as individual preferences, should be considered for individual exercise prescription. Detailed information on exercise prescription in terms of frequency, intensity, time (duration) and type and progression are available in the 2020 ESC Guidelines on sports cardiology and exercise in patients with cardiovascular disease,390 which include recommendations for pre-participation screening and cardiopulmonary exercise testing.390
8.2.3 Weight reduction and diet
Visceral obesity is common and associated with incident hypertension.397,398 An average weight loss of 5 kg has been associated with an average systolic and diastolic BP reduction of 4.4 and 3.6 mmHg, respectively.399 Data show that, starting at an index body mass index (BMI) of 40 kg/m2, a median weight loss of 13% is associated with a 22% lower risk for hypertension.400,401 Maintaining even moderate weight loss of 5%–10% of initial body weight can improve not only BP, but also glucose and lipid metabolism, and potentially reduce premature all-cause mortality.402–404 However, achieving long-term effects in patients with hypertension via weight loss is challenging and the magnitude of these effects remains unclear.405,406 Weight stabilization during middle-age appears to be an important and attainable goal to prevent obesity-related increase in BP later in life.407 Evidence-based diets, such as the Mediterranean diet and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet, are established interventions in patients with hypertension to reduce their BP and CVD risk.408,409 Additional information on healthy dietary patterns is provided in the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice and Supplementary data online.170 In combination with weight-loss and exercise interventions410 and low sodium intake,411 the DASH diet has added effect on BP reduction.412 Pharmacological treatment of obesity with orlistat achieved a slight reduction of 2.6 mmHg in systolic BP.413 The greatest BP-lowering effects of weight-loss medications may be achieved with the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists.414–416 For example, in the Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity (STEP-1) trial, the GLP-1 analogue semaglutide resulted in a mean weight reduction of 12.4% and a 5.1 mmHg reduction in systolic BP.415
8.2.4 Alcohol, coffee, and soft drinks
In a 2020 Cochrane review, the short-term effects of alcohol on BP were dose dependent; low-dose alcohol (<14 g) did not affect BP within 6 h, medium-dose (14–28 g) decreased both systolic and diastolic BP, and highdose alcohol (>30 g) first decreased BP up to 12 h and then increased BP following >13 h of consumption by 3.7 mmHg systolic and 2.4 mmHg diastolic.417 The trials in this Cochrane review included small numbers of women. In the longer term, no evidence has been found for a protective effect of chronic alcohol consumption on hypertension, for either sex. In contrast, even low-dose alcohol consumption (10 g/day) increases chronic risk of hypertension by 14% in men, but not in women.418 As per the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice, men and women are recommended to stay within the upper limit of drinking alcoholic beverages (100 g/week of pure alcohol). Defining number of drinks depends on portion size, the standards of which differ per country, but translates to 8–14 g/drink.170 Emerging data indicate it is likely healthiest to avoid all alcohol, where possible.419 Coffee intake is not associated with a higher risk of hypertension in the general population; in fact, higher coffee consumption may be associated with a lower risk for incident hypertension.420 Data regarding the association between tea drinking and CVD are inconclusive, though mechanistic trials have suggested benefits on BP lowering.421 In contrast, energy drinks with high concentrations of ingredients such as taurine and caffeine increase BP and may lead to acute or chronic cardiovascular complications in young adults.422–424 Consuming two or more servings per day of sugar-sweetened beverages was associated with a 35% higher risk of coronary artery disease in women in the Nurses’ Health Study.425 In the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort, both sugar- and artificially sweetened soft drinks were associated with higher all-cause mortality.426 In children and adolescents, sugar-sweetened beverages increased systolic BP and the risk for incident hypertension.427 It is recommended to restrict free sugar consumption, in particular sugar-sweetened beverages, to a maximum of 10% of energy intake.
8.2.5 Smoking
To stop smoking is arguably the most effective measure in preventing major CVD events at the individual level, likely through improved vascular health.428–431 Estimated health benefits will be even more substantial looking at all-cause morbidity and mortality, e.g. including smoking cessation for cancer prevention. The effects of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) on BP remain unclear and to date there are no robust outcomes data. However, growing evidence suggests that e-cigarettes can increase BP (see Supplementary data online).432,433 Among adults, smoking affects ambulatory BP by raising daily BP,434 but effects of chronic smoking on office BP appear to be small.435 Smoking cessation advice helps, but more intensive interventions are superior.436,437 As recommended by previous ESC Guidelines, smoking cessation is recommended to reduce CVD risk and improve non-CVD health.1,170
ESC Guidelines 3957
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.47
8.3 Pharmacological interventions
8.3.1. Treatment strategy to reduce adverse cardiovascular disease outcomes The main goal of reducing BP is to prevent adverse CVD outcomes. The relative risk reduction afforded by a fixed degree of BP reduction is largely independent of pre-treatment BP.116 There is a clear relationship between the intensity of BP lowering and the relative and absolute reduction in risk of CVD events for all adults, regardless of age (at least up to 85 years), sex, prior CVD, diabetes, or AF.116,131,443–445 With this strong evidence for the ‘the lower the better, but within reason’ paradigm, decision rules are required for selecting patients most likely to benefit from treatment.172 In this section, a summary of evidence for BP-lowering drug treatment is provided, followed by strategies for their use for preventing CVD.
8.3.2 Drug classes with evidence on clinical outcomes
in the target population The major drug classes with robust evidence for BP-mediated reduction in CVD events are ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, diuretics (thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics such as hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone, and indapamide), and beta-blockers (see Supplementary data online, Tables S7 and S8).122,446,447 The first four are recommended as first-line options for starting hypertension treatment in the general population. Beta-blockers can be added preferentially in circumstances such as in the presence of angina or heart failure, after myocardial infarction, or for controlling heart rate, where they are the cornerstone of therapy.122,448,449 In such settings, second-generation (cardioselective) and, specifically, third-generation (vasodilating) beta-blockers are preferred.450 However, beta-blockers are less effective than ACE inhibitors, ARBs, CCBs, or diuretics at preventing stroke, and have a higher discontinuation rate due to side effects.451,452 Beta-blockers and diuretics, especially when combined, are associated with an increased risk of new-onset diabetes in predisposed patients.453,454 The effect of RAS blockers and CCBs on preventing progression of HMOD also appears to be superior to betablockers.455–458 Beta-blockers should also be avoided in patients with isolated systolic hypertension or more generally with arterial stiffness, as they increase stroke volume (given the lower heart rate).218 When therapy and adherence with the above-mentioned drug classes is optimized but insufficient to reach BP goals, other drug classes can be used for treating hypertension. Of these, spironolactone, an MRA, appears to be the most effective at further lowering BP in resistant hypertension; however, more evidence of CVD risk-lowering effects with MRAs among all hypertensive populations, especially those without resistant hypertension, is needed.459 Specifically, while use of MRAs in patients with heart failure has provided clinical evidence on the effectiveness of MRAs for preventing CVD events, dedicated outcome trials in patients with primary hypertension without heart failure are lacking. Because the present guidelines require trial evidence for CVD outcome benefit for a BP-lowering drug or procedure to achieve a Class I recommendation, and given no outcome trials of MRAs have been conducted in general samples of patients with primary hypertension, we have given MRAs a Class IIa recommendation (see below). We acknowledge that spironolactone was provided a Class I recommendation in the 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension. However, to be consistent with our requirement for trial evidence for CVD outcomes benefit in patients with hypertension, the task force agreed to provide a Class IIa recommendation for spironolactone in these 2024 Guidelines. Importantly, it was also agreed that a Class IIa recommendation (i.e. should be considered) is an endorsement of MRAs for
Recommendation Table 15 — Recommendations for non-pharmacological treatment of blood pressure and cardiovascular risk reduction (see Evidence Tables 22–26)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Restriction of sodium to approximately 2 g per day is recommended where possible in all adults with elevated BP and hypertension [this is equivalent to about 5 g of salt (sodium chloride) per day or about a teaspoon or less].353,354 I A Moderate intensity aerobic exercise of ≥150 min/ week (≥30 min, 5–7 days/week) or alternatively 75 min of vigorous intensity aerobic exercise per week over 3 days are recommended and should be complemented with low- or moderate-intensity dynamic or isometric resistance training (2–3 times/ week) to reduce BP and CVD risk. 1,381,390–393 I A It is recommended to aim for a stable and healthy BMI (e.g. 20–25 kg/m2) and waist circumference values (e.g. <94 cm in men and <80 cm in women) to reduce BP and CVD risk.399–401 I A Adopting a healthy and balanced diet, such as the Mediterranean or DASH diets, is recommended to help reduce BP and CVD risk.412,438,439 I A Men and women are recommended to drink less alcohol than the upper limit, which is about 100 g/week of pure alcohol. How this translates into number of drinks depends on portion size (the standards of which differ per country), but most drinks contain 8–14 g of alcohol per drink. Preferably, it is recommended to avoid alcohol to achieve the best health outcomes.170,419,440,441 I B It is recommended to restrict free sugar consumption, in particular sugar-sweetened beverages, to a maximum of 10% of energy intake. It is also recommended to discourage consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, such as soft drinks and fruit juices, starting at a young age.425–427 I B It is recommended to stop tobacco smoking, initiate supportive care and refer to smoking cessation programmes, as tobacco use strongly and independently causes CVD, CVD events, and all-cause mortality.428,429,431,437 I A In patients with hypertension without moderate to advanced CKD and with high daily sodium intake, an increase of potassium intake by 0.5–1.0 g/day—for example through sodium substitution with potassiumenriched salt (comprising 75% sodium chloride and 25% potassium chloride) or through diets rich in fruits and vegetables—should be considered.348,368,373,374,442 IIa A In patients with CKD or taking potassium-sparing medication, such as some diuretics, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or spironolactone, monitoring serum levels of potassium should be considered if dietary potassium is being increased. IIa C © ESC 2024
ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DASH, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.48
treating resistant hypertension but one that acknowledges some uncertainty of outcomes benefit. Future outcome trials of MRAs, perhaps including finerenone,460–462 are encouraged in patients with hypertension. Clinical outcome evidence from trials for other BP-lowering drug classes, such as alpha-blockers, hydralazine, minoxidil, other potassiumsparing diuretics, and centrally acting agents, is less compelling and caution regarding adverse effects is warranted. However, they may be a final addition if all other therapeutic efforts are insufficient to decrease BP. Of note, in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack (ALLHAT) trial, the alpha-blocker arm was stopped early due to futility of benefit for the CVD outcome.463
8.3.3 New therapies with blood pressure-lowering
properties that await supportive evidence from cardiovascular outcomes trials prior to guideline endorsement and routine use in hypertension A few other drug classes with indication in heart failure have emerged that also have BP-lowering properties. For example, the angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNi) sacubitril/valsartan, which was initially developed for hypertension,464 reduces CVD mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure, an effect that may have been mediated, in part, by superior BP lowering compared with enalapril alone.465,466 In a post hoc subgroup analysis, sacubitril/valsartan lowered BP in adults with both heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and resistant hypertension.467 In the context of research studies, sacubitril/valsartan has been used in higher doses (200 mg or 400 mg once daily) for treating hypertension.464,466,468,469 SGLT2 inhibitors have shown favourable effects on CVD events and renal haemodynamics in patients with and without type 2 diabetes, and in heart failure trials.470 In these trials, SGLT2 inhibitors did lower BP, though only modestly.471 Small trials among adults with hypertension have confirmed the potential for BP lowering with this drug class.472,473 Other new drugs with preliminary data include GLP-1 agonists and the new non-steroidal MRAs, e.g. finerenone, in managing hypertension.415,460,461 In addition, novel aldosterone synthase inhibitors (baxdrostat and lorundrostat) have significantly lowered BP in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in phase 2 trials.474,475 The dual endothelin-A and -B receptor antagonist aprocitentan also reduced office and 24 h BP compared with placebo at 4 weeks in patients with resistant hypertension in a phase 3 trial.476 Zilebesiran, an investigational RNA interference agent administered subcutaneously, inhibits hepatic angiotensinogen synthesis and a single dose reduced 24 h BP over approximately 6 months.477
8.3.4 Drug combinations and up-titrating strategies
To treat hypertension, many patients will require more than one BP-lowering medication. Combining drugs from different drug classes can have additive or synergistic effects and lead to greater BP reduction than increasing the dose of one drug.478–483 The superior BP-lowering efficacy of combination therapy is mediated, at least in part, by the potential of combination therapy to target multiple pathophysiological pathways contributing to perturbed BP in each patient.484 A further benefit of combination therapy is the potential to use lower doses of each individual BP-lowering agent, which may reduce side effects and improve adherence and persistence,485 though the evidence for this hypothesis has been questioned.486 Upfront low-dose combination therapy is therefore recommended in persons with hypertension, with the potential advantages of fewer side effects and swifter BP control being important for long-term adherence.487–489 If combination BP-lowering therapy is pursued, singlepill combinations are preferred. For those with elevated BP who have an indication for BP-lowering treatment, monotherapy is recommended in the first instance.
One caveat to combination therapy in hypertension is that patient-level response to individual BP-lowering drug classes can be heterogeneous (suggesting some patients may benefit from more personalized treatment compared with routine combinations).490 This is relevant also with respect to race/ethnicity (see Section 9). Another caveat is that the evidence for reduced CVD outcomes with BP-lowering drugs in combination therapy is based on observational studies.491–493 There are no outcomes data from prospective trials that prove superiority of upfront combination therapy (either as single-pill combinations or as separate pills) over upfront monotherapy in the isolated treatment of hypertension.486 Therefore, we considered giving upfront combination therapy (either as separate pills or as single-pill combinations) a Class IIa recommendation in these guidelines. However, given the totality of evidence for outcomes benefit in observational studies, randomized trial data for better BP control and adherence, and importantly, also given CVD outcomes benefit for polypills (a form of single-pill combination) in randomized trials,494–496 we chose to provide a Class I recommendation for upfront combination therapy in adults with confirmed hypertension, in agreement with 2018 ESC recommendations. The major four drug classes (ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, and thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics) are recommended as firstline BP-lowering medications, either alone or in combination.122,447,484,497 An exception is the combination of two RAS blockers, which is not recommended.498–500 For most hypertensive patients, a single-pill combination, initially containing two of these major drug classes, and initially at low dose, is recommended.489,501,502 Doses of BP-lowering drugs are presented in the Supplementary data online, Tables S7 and S8. When BP is still uncontrolled under maximally tolerated triplecombination (RAS blocker, CCB, and diuretic) therapy, and after adherence is assessed, the patient should be considered resistant and referred to an expert centre for appropriate work-up (see Section 7.5). At the same time, the addition of spironolactone should be considered.459 If spironolactone is not tolerated, eplerenone or other MRA, or beta-blockers (if not already indicated), should be considered. Eplerenone may need to be dosed higher (50–200 mg) for effective BP lowering. In a meta-analysis, eplerenone 25 mg did not lower BP.503 Due to the shorter time of action than spironolactone, eplerenone may need to be administered twice daily for treating hypertension. An alternative to MRA as fourth-line treatment for BP lowering is the use of beta-blockers for persons who do not already have a compelling indication. A vasodilating beta-blocker (e.g. labetalol, carvedilol, or nebivolol) is preferred when a beta-blocker is chosen.504 However, we note that the BP-lowering effects of beta-blockade appears to be less potent than spironolactone in the setting of resistant hypertension.459 Only thereafter should hydralazine, other potassium-sparing diuretics (amiloride and triamterene), centrally acting BP-lowering medications, or alpha-blockers be considered. Given multiple side-effects, minoxidil should only be considered if all other pharmacological agents prove ineffective in resistant hypertension.505 As noted above, polypills combining fixed doses of BP-lowering treatment, lipid-lowering therapy and, if indicated, aspirin are effective in more general CVD prevention.496,506–509 However, the polypill is not available for routine clinical use in many European countries.
8.3.5. A practical algorithm for intensive, effective, and tolerable blood pressure lowering with drug therapy, including considerations around single-pill combinations The aim of the algorithm in Figure 18 is to introduce a low-dose doubleand then triple-combination strategy while monitoring tolerance
ESC Guidelines 3959
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.49
Low-dose double combinationa therapy ACEi or ARBs / CCBs / Diuretics
(Class I)
BP controlled after 1–3 months (assessment at 1 month preferred if possible)
Y FU at least every year
Low-dose triple combination therapy ACEi or ARBs / CCBs / Diuretics
(Class I)
BP controlled after 1–3 months (assessment at 1 month preferred if possible)
Y FU at least every year
BP controlled after 1–3 months (assessment at 1 month preferred if possible)
Y FU at least every year
Refer to hypertension clinic
(Class IIa) At any step: add beta-blockers if compelling indications (angina, post-myocardial infarction, systolic heart failure,
or heart rate control)
(Class I)
Maximally tolerated triple combination therapy ACEi or ARBs / CCBs / Diuretics
(Class I)
Test for adherence
(Class IIa)
Add spironolactone
(Class IIa)
Apparent resistant hypertension
N
N
N
aInitial monotherapy preferred
Elevated BP category (120/70–139/89 mmHg) Moderate-to-severe frailty Symptomatic orthostatic hypotension Age ≥85 years
See section on management of resistant hypertension for further steps as needed
Figure 18 Practical algorithm for pharmacological blood pressure lowering. ACEi, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; FU, follow-up. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.50
N
Patient centred care
Normal Abnormal
≥10% <5% 5% – <10%
Age <40 years, resistant hypertension,
suggestive signs and/or symptoms
Targeted secondary
hypertension
treatment
Screen for secondary
hypertension
(Class I)
Calculate SCORE2/
SCORE2-OP
(Class I)
Assess risk modifiers
(Class IIa)
Consider risk tools
(Class IIb)
Age ≥85 years, moderate-to-severe frailty,
symptomatic OH, short life expectancy
Established CVD, moderate-to-severe CKD,
hypertension-mediated organ damage,
diabetes mellitusa, familial hypercholesterolaemia
Y
N N N Y
Y Y
Non-elevated BP Office SBP <120 mmHg and
DBP <70 mmHg Elevated BP Office SBP 120–139 mmHg
and/or DBP 70–89 mmHg Hypertension Office SBP ≥140 mmHg and/or
DBP ≥90 mmHg
ABPM / HBPM preferred over office BP Target SBP 120–129 mmHg
(Class I)
Target DBP 70–79 mmHg
(Class IIb)
Screen BP opportunistically Lifestyle measures
Drug treatment for confirmed
BP ≥130/80 mmHg
Monitor BP and medication toleranceb
Screening for hypertension Opportunistic: every 3 years <40 years;
every year ≥40 years HBPM/ABPM or repeated standardized office BP
Confirming hypertension
Lifestyle measures
Figure 19 Central Illustration. ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CKD, chronic kidney disease; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; OH, orthostatic hypotension; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2–Older Persons. Summary algorithm for BP classification and management. See Section 5 for recommendations on out-of-office confirmation of the three BP categories. aAdults with type 2 diabetes mellitus only and younger than 60 years should be considered for SCORE2-Diabetes assessment. bThough scientific data demonstrate that, under research conditions, the optimal target BP is ≤120/70 mmHg, the target BP recommended by these guidelines in routine practice is 120–129/70–79 mmHg. If achieving this target is not possible, or if treatment is not well tolerated, then BP should be treated to as low as reasonably achievable. For persons with elevated BP, treatment with lifestyle measures for 3 months is first recommended, prior to considering medications.
ESC Guidelines 3961
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.51
among patients with hypertension, and only afterwards to start uptitrating doses to maximum amounts. Initiation with monotherapy, slower up-titration, and lower dosing should be considered in the setting of elevated BP and increased CVD risk, or in moderate-to-severe frailty, limited life expectancy, symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, or older people (aged ≥85 years). Ideally, BP should be treated to target within 3 months to retain the confidence of the patient, to ensure long-term adherence, and to reduce CVD risk.71 An overview of the recommended approach to BP management in all adult patients is provided in Figure 19 (Central Illustration). Also, of note, teleconsultation, multidisciplinary or nurse-led care, or patient self-monitoring can help with achieving BP control in certain healthcare systems.75,510,511
8.3.6 Timing of blood pressure-lowering drug
treatment Current evidence does not show benefit of diurnal timing of BP-lowering drug administration on major CVD outcomes.512 It is important that medication is taken at the most convenient time of day to improve adherence. Patients should also be encouraged to take medications at the same time each day and in a consistent setting, to help ensure adherence.246,513
8.4 Selecting patients for pharmacological
blood pressure-lowering treatment Commencement of BP-lowering treatment is often decided based on office BP measurements but, where possible, the present guidelines strongly recommend using out-of-office BP measurement for confirming elevated BP and hypertension (see Section 5). As detailed in Section 6, an office BP of <120/70 mmHg is categorized in these guidelines as non-elevated BP. When a patient is diagnosed with confirmed hypertension (sustained BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg), starting BP-lowering treatment is recommended irrespective of CVD risk, which should consist of a simultaneous combination of lifestyle interventions and pharmacological therapy. Lifestyle interventions are crucial as an initial treatment step, and must be strongly emphasized with the patient, but concurrent pharmacological therapy is recommended. This concurrent initiation of lifestyle and pharmacological therapy should not give patients the impression that lifestyle changes are of lesser importance, and the patient should be counselled that these lifestyle changes may allow subsequent discontinuation or down-titration of medication, which can be used as motivation to persist with lifestyle changes. After treatment initiation, the patient should be seen frequently (e.g. every 1–3 months with a GP or specialist) until BP is controlled. BP should be controlled, preferably within 3 months (see also Section 6 and algorithm Figure 18). If lifestyle changes are effective in BP lowering, pharmacological treatments may subsequently be down-titrated or stopped as appropriate. When office BP is 120–139/70–89 mmHg, the patient is considered as having elevated BP, and further CVD risk stratification is recommended to guide therapy (Table 14).
• In patients with elevated BP who are not at increased risk for CVD (10-year CVD risk <10%) and do not have other high-risk conditions or risk modifiers, BP-lowering lifestyle measures are recommended.
Recommendation Table 16 — Recommendations for pharmacological treatment of hypertension (see Evidence Tables 27, 28, and 29)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Among all BP-lowering drugs, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, and diuretics (thiazides and thiazide-like drugs such as chlorthalidone and indapamide) have demonstrated the most effective reduction of BP and CVD events, and are therefore recommended as first-line treatments to lower BP.122,446 I A It is recommended that beta-blockers are combined with any of the other major BP-lowering drug classes when there are other compelling indications for their use, e.g. angina, post-myocardial infarction, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, or for heart rate control.122,448–450 I A It is recommended to take medications at the most convenient time of day for the patient to establish a habitual pattern of medication taking to improve adherence.246,513 I B Given trial evidence for more effective BP control vs. monotherapy, combination BP-lowering treatment is recommended for most patients with confirmed hypertension (BP ≥140/90 mmHg) as initial therapy. Preferred combinations are a RAS blocker (either an ACE inhibitor or an ARB) with a dihydropyridine CCB or diuretic. Exceptions to consider include patients aged ≥85 years, those with symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, moderate-to-severe frailty, or elevated BP (systolic BP 120–139 mmHg or diastolic BP 70–89 mmHg) with a concomitant indication for treatment.131,480,483,484,489 I B
Continued In patients receiving combination BP-lowering
treatment, fixed-dose single-pill combination treatment is recommended.484,489,501,502,514 I B If BP is not controlled with a two-drug combination, increasing to a three-drug combination is recommended, usually a RAS blocker with a dihydropyridine CCB and a thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, and preferably in a single-pill combination.489 I B If BP is not controlled with a three-drug combination, adding spironolactone should be considered.459 IIa B If BP is not controlled with a three-drug combination and in whom spironolactone is not effective or tolerated, treatment with eplerenone instead of spironolactone,503 or the addition of a beta-blocker if not already indicated459 and, next, a centrally acting BP-lowering medication,515 an alpha-blocker,515 hydralazine, or a potassium-sparing diuretic should be considered.516 IIa B Combining two RAS blockers (ACE inhibitor and an ARB) is not recommended.498–500,517 III A © ESC 2024
ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CVD, cardiovascular disease; RAS, renin– angiotensin system. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.52
While there are not enough outcomes data for a drug recommendation in lower CVD risk adults with elevated BP, there is some evidence to suggest that relative treatment effects of BP lowering are similar across a wide range of predicted risk categories, including among those with a <10% risk.518 Therefore, while we do not provide a formal recommendation for this, if initial lifestyle measures are not successful after 6–12 months, drug treatment might be discussed on an individual basis among lower CVD-risk adults when BP is between 130/80 and <140/90 mmHg.518 • In patients with elevated BP (office BP of 120–139/70–89 mmHg) who are at sufficiently high risk for CVD (e.g. 10-year CVD risk ≥ 10%) or in the presence of high-risk conditions or borderline 10-year CVD risk (5% - <10%) combined with risk modifiers or abnormal risk tool tests, BP-lowering lifestyle measures should be initiated for 3 months. Following this, pharmacological therapy is recommended for persons with confirmed BP of ≥130/80 mmHg, when these lifestyle changes have not worked or are not being implemented (Section 8.2) Prompt addition of pharmacological therapy, if needed by 3 months, should be emphasized, to avoid therapeutic inertia.519 For those with BP of 120–129/70–79 mmHg, ongoing and intensified lifestyle intervention is preferred.
The above recommendations apply to all individuals with elevated BP, irrespective of age. However, recognizing the lack of conclusive evidence and added risk of side effects among certain subgroups, the task force also recommends that, among patients with elevated BP, BP-lowering treatment should always be started based on individual clinical judgment and shared decision-making. In addition, consideration of BP-lowering drug treatment should be deferred until BP is >140/90 mmHg in the following settings: pretreatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, age ≥85 years, clinically significant moderate-to-severe frailty, and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years) due to high competing risk (including eGFR < 30 mL/ min/1.73 m2). Patients with elevated BP in these settings are less likely to obtain sufficient net benefit from BP-lowering drug therapy or to tolerate intensive drug therapy. Section 9 contains more information on the treatment of specific subgroups, including older and frail adults.
Table 14 Initiation of blood pressure-lowering treatment based on confirmed blood pressure category and cardiovascular disease risk
Blood pressure (mmHg) Non-elevated BP
(<120/70) Elevated BP (120/70 to 139/89) Hypertension (≥140/90)
Risk
(a) All adults with SBP 120– 129 mmHg (b) SBP 130–139 AND 10-year estimated CVD risk <10% AND no high-risk conditions or risk modifiers or abnormal risk tool tests (a) SBP 130–139 AND high-risk conditions (e.g. established CVD, diabetes mellitus, CKD, FH or HMOD) (b) SBP 130–139 AND 10-year estimated CVD risk ≥10% (c) SBP 130–139 AND 10-year estimated CVD risk 5% - <10% AND risk modifiers or abnormal risk tool tests Assumed all at sufficiently high risk to benefit from pharmacological treatment
Treatment Lifestyle measures for prevention Screen BP and CVD risk opportunistically Lifestyle measures for treatment Monitor BP and CVD risk yearly Lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment (after 3-month delay). Monitor BP yearly once treatment control is established Lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment (immediate) Monitor BP yearly once treatment control is established Target (mmHg) Maintain BP <120/70 Aim BP 120–129/70–79 mmHga © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; FH, familial hypercholesterolaemia; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; SBP, systolic blood pressure. aCaution in adults with orthostatic hypotension, moderate-to-severe frailty, limited life expectancy, and older patients (aged ≥85 years).
Recommendation Table 17 — Recommendations for initiating blood pressure-lowering treatment (see Evidence Tables 30–32)
Recommendations Classa Levelb In adults with elevated BP and low/medium CVD risk (<10% over 10 years), BP lowering with lifestyle measures is recommended and can reduce the risk of CVD.119,120,348,408,411,520,521 I B In adults with elevated BP and sufficiently high CVD riskc, after 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed BP ≥130/ 80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk.116,522 I A It is recommended that in hypertensive patients with confirmed BP ≥140/90 mmHg, irrespective of CVD risk, lifestyle measures and pharmacological BP-lowering treatment are initiated promptly to reduce CVD risk.116,121,122 I A It is recommended to maintain BP-lowering drug treatment lifelong, even beyond the age of 85 years, if well tolerated.523–525 I A Because the benefit in reducing CVD outcomes is uncertain in these settings, and noting that close monitoring of treatment tolerance is advised, BP-lowering treatment should only be considered from ≥140/90 mmHg among persons meeting the following criteria: pre-treatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, age ≥85 years, clinically significant moderate-to-severe frailty, and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years).131,524,526,527 IIa B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. c10-year estimated CVD risk of ≥10%; or 10-year estimated CVD risk of 5% - ≤10% plus risk modifiers or abnormal risk tool tests; or high-risk conditions (e.g. established CVD, diabetes, moderate or severe CKD, familial hypercholesterolaemia, or hypertension-mediated organ damage).
ESC Guidelines 3963
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.53
8.5 Intensity of blood pressure-lowering
therapy and ideal treatment targets 8.5.1. Expected degree of blood pressure reduction with approved drugs The magnitude of BP reduction achieved with the main classes of BP-lowering medications (ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, diuretics, and beta-blockers) as monotherapy is similar overall.528,529 BP reduction with standard doses of any of these five classes can be expected to be approximately 9/5 mmHg with office BP and 5/3 mmHg with ABPM.478 These BP-lowering effects may attenuate over time.530 Combination therapy (e.g. with three drugs at half standard dose) over the short term can lower office BP by up to 20/11 mmHg.478,531 The reason why beta-blockers are not considered first-line BP-lowering medications (outside of compelling indications) is not because of inferior BP-lowering properties (particularly for vasodilating beta-blockers),532 but because of inferior efficacy in reducing CVD events (particularly stroke) among patients with hypertension, and tolerance issues.533–536 The BP-lowering effect of each BP medication class generally increases with the dose administered, though this relationship is not linear.537 Effects of each medication can also vary at the individual level, sometimes requiring personalization by matching the patient with the best medication for them.490 The magnitude of BP reduction for any BP-lowering medication may increase as a function of the pre-treatment BP, which is also known as Wilders principle.538,539 The BP-lowering effect of pharmacological therapy is typically evident after 1–2 weeks of treatment,540 but the maximum effect might take longer to manifest. Therefore, the advised follow-up after 1–3 months (1 month preferred with a GP or specialist) allows for assessment of tolerance/safety, but also allows enough time to gauge the full BP-lowering effect of each drug titration (see Section 8.3.4).
8.5.2 The ideal target of blood pressure-lowering
treatment As discussed in Section 6, optimal control of BP translates into CVD risk reduction, thereby reducing morbidity and mortality in the population.116,478,541 BP threshold is defined as the BP at which BP-lowering treatment is initiated, while BP target is the BP goal with treatment. The BP threshold to initiate BP-lowering therapy is not necessarily the same as the recommended BP target once therapy is commenced (in other words, treatment threshold and treatment target may not be the same for a given patient). Specifically, for hypertensive patients in whom BP-lowering treatment is recommended above a baseline BP of ≥140/ 90 mmHg, the recommended target of BP-lowering therapy is 120–129/ 70–79 mmHg, provided treatment is well tolerated (see Supplementary data online). Persons with elevated BP who receive treatment are also recommended to achieve a target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg. Therefore, the treatment target in the 2024 Guidelines is always 120–129/70–79 mmHg (but only if treatment is tolerated and with certain exceptions where more lenient targets are advised). In contrast, the treatment threshold may differ based on CVD risk, specifically in the elevated BP category. For example, in addition to hypertensive adults with BP ≥140/90 mmHg, there are individuals with an office systolic BP of 130–139 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of 80–89 mmHg who have sufficiently high CVD risk to recommend BP-lowering drug treatment. The BP target range of 120–129/70–79 mmHg recommended in these guidelines reflects the most current evidence from contemporaneous RCTs135,136,146,542–545 and from meta-analyses of RCTs.131 Of note, this treatment target reduces CVD events in older adults136,523 with evidence for efficacy of more intensive BP-lowering treatment targets established up to age 85 years.131 Furthermore, research data indicate that, to optimally reduce CVD risk, achieving an ontreatment BP of 120/70 mmHg is the best point on the BP target range provided in our guideline recommendations (Figure 20). However, while we strongly considered recommending a treatment target of exactly 120/70 mmHg with out-of-office BP confirmation, we instead chose a target range of 120–129/70–79 mmHg (preferably with out-of-office BP confirmation but also allowing for office BP) for the following reasons: providing flexibility to patients and clinicians; feedback from external peer review; feedback from patients that lifestyle is preferred to medication unless BP is in the hypertensive range; the knowledge that contemporary treat-to-target intensive BP trials included only persons with baseline systolic BP of ≥130 mmHg; and a recognition that the BP values recorded under research conditions using systematic approaches to measurement (while strongly recommended by these guidelines) are not always the same as BP values recorded under routine clinical care, which can be 5–10 mmHg higher.65,66
In addition, the trial data confirming efficacy for our recommended treatment target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg do not necessarily apply to moderately-to-severely frail adults who were generally excluded from trials. Furthermore, the data supporting this BP target among adults aged >85 years are inconclusive.131 Frailty can occur at different ages and is, together with tolerability of BP-lowering treatment, an important characteristic when considering the BP target for a given patient. Accordingly, personalized BP-lowering treatment should be instituted in people aged ≥85 years and/or those with significant frailty. Recommended indicators of frailty in guiding BP-lowering treatment are given in Section 9. Several important nuances are highlighted and warrant consideration prior to implementing the new BP target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg among patients receiving BP-lowering therapy:
• Evidence for a systolic BP-lowering treatment target of 120–129 mmHg is strong (Class I, level of evidence A). • Evidence for a specific diastolic BP-lowering treatment target is less strong in those who are treated to a systolic target of 120–129 mmHg. While most adults treated to a systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg will also achieve a diastolic BP of 70–79 mmHg, not all will.543,546 Furthermore, adults who achieve systolic BP control are generally at low relative risk for CVD, even when diastolic BP is 70–90 mmHg.547,548 Nonetheless, due in part to the known higher risk of isolated diastolic hypertension among younger adults,549 the task force agreed that it is reasonable to target an on-treatment diastolic BP of 70–79 mmHg among patients with diastolic BP of ≥80 mmHg who are already at the systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg (Class IIb, level of evidence C). • The task force acknowledges the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice,170 which take a stepwise approach to their recommendations for BP-lowering treatment. The 2021 Guidelines recommended an on-treatment systolic BP target of 130–139 mmHg as the first step and then—based on patient preferences, risk, and frailty—to aim for a target on-treatment systolic BP of <130 mmHg as the second step. While we recognize the potential value of this two-step approach, which many clinicians may choose to follow, the current guidelines emphasize one ontreatment BP target (120–129/70–79 mmHg, provided treatment is tolerated). This one-step approach is based on the evidence, and motivated to discourage therapeutic inertia around BP lowering. As an illustrative example of the latter concern for therapeutic inertia, an Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.54
on-treatment systolic BP of 135 mmHg (office) may be considered reasonable when reviewing the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice but, we hope, will not be considered reasonable to those who follow the updated 2024 ESC Guidelines presented here. Specifically, it is well established that an on-treatment systolic BP of 135 mmHg is not optimal relative to more intensive control.116,131,135,136,445,542,543,545 • We acknowledge that the results from RCTs cannot always be extrapolated to routine clinical care. In addition, we recognize the increased risk of side effects among patients receiving more intensive BP-lowering treatments, compared with traditional BP targets.545,550 Accordingly, an important caveat to our treatment target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg is the recommendation to pursue this target only when treatment is well tolerated. In cases where BP-lowering treatment is not well tolerated and a target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg is not possible, it is recommended to follow the ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA) principle, by targeting treatment to a BP that is as low as reasonably achievable. • In addition to adults with significant frailty and/or who are ≥85 years of age, the evidence for a BP-lowering treatment target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg may also not generalize to patients with: (i) pre-treatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, (ii) limited predicted lifespan (e.g. <3 years),527 and/or (iii) high levels of competing risk for non-CVD death including CKD with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) (see Section 9).
Finally, as outlined in Section 5, these guidelines endorse a ‘trust but verify’ approach to office BP measurements, and, where possible, confirming BP with accurate out-of-office BP measurements (ABPM, HBPM) is recommended prior to starting treatment, to monitor the treatment effect of BP-lowering medication.
8.5.3 Personalizing treatment strategies
Though promising, there is little to no evidence to date from CVD outcome trials to use novel biomarkers for individualizing BP-lowering treatment.551,552 Nonetheless, different patient groups
SBP 120 mmHg is the optimal point in this range if tolerated
SBP target range 120–129 mmHg (Class I) Target SBP as low as reasonably achievable
(preferably <140) if 120–129 mmHg target not tolerated or in these settings: Pre-treatment
symptomatic orthostatic hypotension and/or
age ≥85 years
(Class IIa)
Clinically significant moderate-to-severe
frailty at any age and/or limited predicted lifespan
(<3 years) (Class IIb)
Exclude hypertensive
emergency Assess for symptoms or signs of hypotension
Non-elevated SBP
(<120 mmHg) Elevated SBP (120–139 mmHg)
20 40
60 80 120 130 140 160 180 200
220 240
100 110
260 280 mmHg
Systolic hypertension
(≥140 mmHg)
Figure 20 Systolic blood pressure categories and treatment target range. BP, blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure.
ESC Guidelines 3965
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.55
can be identified, and medication initiation can be tailored to preexisting conditions, such as diabetes mellitus, CKD, AF, postmyocardial infarction, heart failure, metabolic syndrome, and proteinuria/albuminuria (Section 9). History of previous side effects and possible and compelling indications also need to be considered when selecting treatment (see Supplementary data online, Tables S9 and S10). Cardioselective beta-blockers may be used in low dose in chronic asthma,553,554 in line with their use in patients with heart failure with chronic asthma. For considerations of BP-lowering treatment among specific patient populations of interest, including different racial/ethnic populations, see Section 9.
8.5.4 Duration and monitoring of drug therapy
BP-lowering treatment is usually chronic, often lifelong. This raises the question of long-term efficiency, long-term side effects, adherence, and persistence with therapy. While BP-lowering therapies typically provide an overall durable effect, some attenuation of effect may be seen over time.66,530 First-line BP-lowering medication classes appear to be safe for long-term use.555–557 Once BP is controlled, at least a yearly follow-up is advised. Because of the known temporal variability in BP558,559 and medication efficacy in the long term,530 medication changes may be necessary over time (see Supplementary data online).
8.6 Device-based blood pressure lowering
Several device-based therapies designed to lower BP have been investigated.560,561 To date, the best evidence exists for catheter-based renal denervation.
8.6.1 Catheter-based renal denervation
Sympathetic nervous system overactivity contributes to the development and progression of hypertension.562 Renal denervation aims to interrupt afferent and efferent sympathetic nerves in the adventitia and perivascular tissue of the renal arteries.563 The 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension did not recommend the use of device-based therapies for routine treatment of hypertension, unless in the context of clinical studies and RCTs.1 This was based on negative data using first-generation radiofrequency catheters (see Supplementary data online). More recent data from sham-controlled trials investigating secondgeneration radiofrequency and ultrasound catheters demonstrated a BP-lowering efficacy in a broad range of patients, with and without concomitant BP-lowering medications, including those with resistant hypertension.564–568 Long-term, non-randomized, follow-up data from the Global Symplicity Registry,569 Symplicity HTN-3 trial,570 Spyral HTN-ON MED pilot trial,571 and A Study of the Recor Medical Paradise System in Clinical Hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN) SOLO trial572 indicate a sustained BP-lowering effect for up to 3 years. A single-centre open-label study suggested sustained BP reductions up to 10 years.573 These data also highlight a potentially important advantage of renal denervation, namely that the BP-lowering effect of this intervention might be ‘always on’, making this approach attractive for patients with suboptimal medication adherence.254 Some patients may prefer a one-off procedure rather than taking daily medications chronically and may request renal denervation. Of significance, there are no reported procedure-related serious safety signals in the first- and second-generation trials beyond the usual risk of femoral arterial access procedures (noting that most trials to date were not powered for safety outcomes and that the task force could find no published meta-analysis data on exact rates of major bleeding and major femoral artery vascular access complications after renal denervation procedures). However, the rate of major bleeding
Recommendation Table 18 — Recommendations for blood pressure targets with treatment (see Evidence Table 34)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
To reduce CVD risk, it is recommended that treated systolic BP values in most adults be targeted to 120– 129 mmHg, provided the treatment is well tolerated.22,122,131,523,541 I A In cases where BP-lowering treatment is poorly tolerated and achieving a systolic of 120–129 mmHg is not possible, it is recommended to target a systolic BP level that is ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA principle).22,122,131,523,541 I A Because the CVD benefit of an on-treatment systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg may not generalize to the following specific settings, personalized and more lenient BP targets (e.g. <140 mmHg) should be considered among patients meeting the following criteria: pre-treatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, and/or age ≥85 years.131 IIa C Because the CVD benefit of an on-treatment systolic BP target of 120–129 mmHg may not generalize to the following specific settings, personalized and more lenient BP targets (e.g. <140/90 mmHg) may be considered among patients meeting the following criteria: clinically significant moderate-to-severe frailty at any age, and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years). IIb C In cases where on-treatment systolic BP is at or below target (120–129 mmHg) but diastolic BP is not at target (≥80 mmHg), intensifying BP-lowering treatment to achieve an on-treatment diastolic BP of 70–79 mmHg may be considered to reduce CVD risk. IIb C © ESC 2024
ALARA, as low as reasonably achievable; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Recommendation Table 19 — Recommendations for follow-up in patients with treated hypertension (see Evidence Table 33)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Once BP is controlled and stable under BP-lowering therapy, at least a yearly follow-up for BP and other CVD risk factors should be considered. IIa C © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.56
and major femoral artery vascular access complications for coronary angiography using a femoral approach is typically reported as 1%–4%574,575 but has been reported as 5%–10% in some studies.575 Trials investigating radial access for renal denervation are currently ongoing (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05234788). After renal denervation, there is a 0.25%–0.5% rate of renal artery stenosis/dissection requiring stenting.576 Long-term follow-up data up to 3 years have not suggested worsening of renal function beyond the expected rates in patients with hypertension with mildly-to-moderately reduced renal function.569,577 Of note, sham-controlled trials to date excluded patients with severely reduced kidney function at baseline.564,566–568 Despite the clear promise of renal denervation in reducing BP, there are some concerns that warrant consideration, as we indicate in the recommendations. First, the effect of current renal denervation catheter technologies on BP lowering is relatively modest for an invasive procedure (meta-analyses report placebo-corrected systolic BP lowering of approximately 6 mmHg on office BP assessment and 4 mmHg on 24 h ABPM).578 As such, the average BP-lowering effect of renal denervation appears no more than for one standard BP-lowering medication. Accordingly, many adults undergoing renal denervation will likely require ongoing, post-procedural, BP-lowering drugs. Second, the cost-effectiveness of renal denervation has not been fully established. Since effects of current renal denervation technologies are similar to that of one standard BP-lowering medication, most of which are generic, it is difficult to see a scenario where renal denervation could be proven cost-effective for most patients. An exception might be patients who are at very high risk of CVD events and who have uncontrolled BP due to resistant hypertension (with or without non-adherence).579,580 Third, there are no adequately powered outcomes trials demonstrating that renal denervation reduces CVD events and is safe in the long term. While observational reports have suggested associations between renal denervation and reduced risk for CVD events,581,582 these observational data have major inferential limitations including a significant potential for confounding. While BP lowering is typically a good surrogate for CVD benefit, there is no guarantee that this is true with renal denervation and, furthermore, off-target effects independent of BP could influence CVD and other adverse-event rates after the procedure. Because of the lack of outcomes trials, renal denervation cannot reach the Class I indication threshold set by this task force. Arguments that outcomes trials will not be funded are insufficient to influence guideline recommendations. However, it is hoped that the position of these guidelines will motivate industry to sponsor the necessary renal denervation outcomes trials. Fourth, related to the lack of outcomes data, the potentially ‘always on’ effect of renal denervation could backfire if late complications emerge. Medications causing complications or side effects can simply be stopped and replaced with alternative medications when such problems emerge; this is not true with renal denervation. Fifth, the impact of scaling up renal denervation on usual cardiac department catheterization laboratory workflows is of some concern. Specifically, it is important that renal denervation procedures do not delay timely access to other elective procedures with proven efficacy in reducing CVD outcomes.583 Sixth, there is still no direct evidence to gauge whether renal denervation procedures are successful and that the kidneys are denervated and do not reinnervate over time.584 Relatedly, the concept of responders and non-responders to renal denervation (and the hypothesis that predictors of response might be found to help identify patients most suitable for the procedure) is questioned. Medical interventions, including drugs, are naturally subject to inter-individual variability in response.567 Additionally, there are few examples in medicine of consistent and clinically useful predictors of treatment response for medical conditions that have complex genetic and environmental underpinnings (i.e. conditions like hypertension).
A multidisciplinary hypertension team, including experts in hypertension and percutaneous cardiovascular interventions, is recommended to evaluate the indication and to perform the procedure.585 Based on the available evidence, renal denervation may be considered for patients who have uncontrolled, true resistant hypertension with a three-drug combination and who express a preference to undergo renal denervation.566,568,585 This recommendation is informed, in part, by the higher risk of CVD events in this subgroup, which represents a major unmet clinical need and which also means that cost-effectiveness considerations are likely to be optimal in this setting. In patients who are non-adherent or intolerant to multiple BP-lowering medications, particularly first-line agents, and who have high predicted CVD risk and a BP that is not at target, renal denervation may, for the same reasons, be considered if the patients express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a tailored shared decision-making process. The shared decision-making process requires that the patients are fully informed about the benefits, limitations, and risks associated with renal denervation.
Recommendation Table 20 — Recommendations for device-based treatment of hypertension (see Evidence Table 35)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may be considered for resistant hypertension patients who have BP that is uncontrolled despite a three BP-lowering drug combination (including a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic), and who express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment.564,566–568,586–590 IIb B To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may be considered for patients with both increased CVD risk and uncontrolled hypertension on fewer than three drugs, if they express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment.564,566– 568,586–590 IIb A
Due to a lack of adequately powered outcomes trials demonstrating its safety and CVD benefits, renal denervation is not recommended as a first-line BP-lowering intervention for hypertension. III C Renal denervation is not recommended for treating hypertension in patients with moderate-to-severely impaired renal function (eGFR <40 mL/min/1.73 m2) or secondary causes of hypertension, until further evidence becomes available. III C © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3967
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.57
8.6.2 Other devices
Most device-based therapies investigated for BP-lowering therapy in hypertension have been aimed at modulating the autonomic nervous system activity (baroreflex activation therapy, endovascular baroreflex amplification therapy, and carotid body ablation).560 Cardiac neuromodulation therapy aims to lower left ventricular preload by variably altering the atrioventricular interval using a dual-chamber, rate-responsive, implantable pulse generator in patients indicated for implantation or replacement of a dual-chamber pacemaker.591,592 Some, though not all, of these devices have shown promising results in non-randomized, single-arm studies. A sham-controlled trial investigating central iliac arteriovenous stent anastomosis was terminated early after longer-term follow-up data indicated an increase in heart failure in the stent group.561 Therefore, the use of these device-based therapies is not recommended for routinely treating hypertension until further evidence regarding their safety and efficacy becomes available (see Supplementary data online).
8.7 Unintended and potentially harmful
consequences of blood pressure lowering and implications for treatment targets 8.7.1. Adverse effects of blood pressure-lowering medications 8.7.1.1. Symptomatic adverse effects BP-lowering medications have multiple side effects, which may be more common in females.536,593,594 Although generally well tolerated, common side effects include headaches, cough, dizziness or light-headedness, diarrhoea or constipation, fatigue, ankle swelling, and erectile problems, depending on the drug class (see Supplementary data online, Table S9).536,550,593–597 In randomized trials of adults aged >60 years, the overall rate of symptomatic BP-lowering drug withdrawal was higher than the rate of placebo withdrawal (approximately 15% vs. 5%).593 A systematic review, which included 280 638 participants in 58 RCTs, reported no evidence for an increased relative risk of falls in those taking BP-lowering drugs.550 There was, however, an increased relative risk of mild hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury, hypotension, and syncope. Furthermore, very frail adults were excluded from BP-lowering trials, which is relevant because such patients are more prone to adverse effects and polypharmacy (see Supplementary data online).596
8.7.1.2 Renal effects
A systematic review reported an increased risk of acute kidney injury and hyperkalaemia associated with BP-lowering treatment.550 Analyses of outcomes by specific drug class showed that drugs affecting the RAAS were more likely to be associated with acute kidney injury and hyperkalaemia.550 Patients with significant CKD tend to be excluded from RCTs.137,545,598 It is important to remember these exclusion criteria, and that patients with CKD are more likely to suffer from resistant hypertension, when extrapolating the results of more intensive BP lowering to patients with moderate-to-severe CKD (see Section 9).599
8.7.1.3 Erectile dysfunction
Older classes of BP-lowering drugs (including diuretics, beta-blockers, and centrally acting medications) are associated with erectile dysfunction.600 However, newer classes have neutral effects.601
Angiotensin receptor antagonists may have beneficial effect on erectile function.602
8.7.2 Pill burden and non-adherence
More intensive treatment of elevated BP and hypertension may be associated with an increased risk of polypharmacy and pill burden, which are themselves associated with non-adherence.603,604 Single-pill, fixeddose drug combinations can help to reduce pill burden and are recommended to improve adherence (refer to Section 8.3.4). Increased intensity of BP lowering (while ultimately cost reducing in terms of CVD reduction)605 can also result in higher upfront direct and indirect healthcare costs, with more people requiring medication and higher demand for technology-based adherence strategies, which can be challenging to implement, especially in resource-poor settings.604
8.7.3 Potentially harmful consequences of blood
pressure lowering for frail older people Unintended consequences of BP lowering (hypotension, syncope, falls) can be hazardous for frail older people in particular.606 Retrospective studies have shown that adults aged >75 years from the general population, who would have met the criteria for inclusion in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), had a rate of injurious falls and syncope that was nearly five times that of the standard care group in the trial. This suggests that healthy participant bias may have contributed to the findings of SPRINT and other similar BP-lowering trials, and that the results may not fully generalize to older adults in more routine clinical care.607 Patients’ functional ability should be considered in addition to age to help negate any unintended consequences of BP lowering in a frailer cohort. Despite their chronological age, older patients with hypertension who are fit and can independently carry out activities of daily living will benefit from guideline-directed treatment similar to younger cohorts.131 However, tailoring treatment targets and treatment plans for frail older patients is necessary to avoid unintended consequences. This should include assessing frailty, including cognitive status, risk of falls, propensity for symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, polypharmacy, and other comorbid conditions.608,609 Of note, and as detailed in Section 9, some data indicate a benefit of more intensive BP-lowering on cognitive function.523,610,611 For those with loss of function but preserved activities of daily living, a more detailed geriatric assessment is required to explore the risks and benefits of treatment, as well as considerations for tailoring therapeutic strategies where appropriate. For patients who are both functionally impaired and unable to carry out activities of daily living, the therapeutic goals of hypertension treatment should be personalized, and medications discontinued where appropriate (see Section 9.3).596
8.7.4 Clinical inertia in blood pressure lowering
The fear of serious adverse events with BP-lowering medications is often cited as a reason for clinical inertia, although the evidence to date from meta-analyses of RCTs suggests these side-effect concerns may be exaggerated.550,612 However, RCTs often select populations with less frailty and multimorbidity who are more likely to tolerate treatment.613 Consequently, fewer adverse effects might be reported than would be expected in the general population. It remains up to individual clinicians to initiate shared decision-making with each patient, especially patients in vulnerable groups and those who have experienced previous adverse events, weighing up potential benefits against risks of treatment.614,615 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.58
9 Managing specific patient groups
or circumstances
9.1 Young adulthood (18–40 years)
9.1.1. Definition and epidemiology In the present guidelines ‘young adulthood’ is defined as age 18–40 years. The prevalence of hypertension in young adults is increasing in men and women.616–618 Unhealthy lifestyle, gender, obesity, and socio-economic factors contribute.617,619–621 Hypertension-attributable CVD burden in young adults, evaluated as mortality or years of living with disability, has increased in the last decades, especially in low- and middle-income countries and in men.622 Hypertension awareness, treatment, and control in young adults is lower than in other age categories, a result driven by worse control in young men.623 Systolic and diastolic hypertension and isolated diastolic hypertension are associated with increased CVD risk in the young (see Supplementary data online).624 Isolated systolic hypertension in the young is discussed in Section 9.4.
9.1.2 Secondary hypertension in young adulthood
Secondary hypertension is more frequent in younger than in lateronset hypertension, with a prevalence of 15%–30% in hypertensive young adults reported from some referral centres.625,626 Major causes of secondary hypertension include drug-induced hypertension (e.g. oestrogen-progesterone oral contraceptives; cold medication) and primary aldosteronism. The use of recreational drugs/substances, as well as supplements and energy drinks should be investigated (see Section 7). Combined oestrogen-progesterone contraceptives are among the most common causes of drug-induced hypertension in young women,627,628 and should not be used in hypertensive women unless there is no other method available or acceptable to the patient.629 Conversely, progestin-only contraceptives are generally considered safe in women with hypertension.89,630,631 Fibromuscular dysplasia should be considered as a cause of secondary hypertension in young women,626,632 whereas primary aldosteronism, the most common form of secondary hypertension, is equally common in different age classes.316 Screening for secondary hypertension is thus recommended in young adults with hypertension. However, in obese young adults, primary hypertension is more common, though OSAS should also be considered in this instance.633
9.1.3 Measurement and management of blood
pressure in young adults Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended in young adults for confirming diagnosis, since the white-coat phenomenon occurs in the young.634 Because of the lower absolute CVD risk in this age category compared with older adults, hard-endpoint randomized trials of BP lowering in young adults have not been performed. However, since relative risk reduction by BP-lowering treatment is homogeneous in any age group, including those <55 years old,131 young adults with suitable indications are also expected to benefit from BP-lowering therapy. The hypertension management algorithm based on CVD risk proposed in Section 6 is not fully applicable in young adults, since SCORE2 has not been validated for individuals <40 years old. Even risk stratification based on lifetime risk assessment does not apply to very young adults (e.g. 20–30 years of age).128 In the absence of established CVD, diabetes mellitus, familial hypercholesterolaemia, and moderate or severe CKD a BP-lowering treatment initiation threshold of office 140/90 mmHg is appropriate in most young adults. However, HMOD assessment may be considered in patients aged <40 years to stratify individuals with elevated BP into a higher risk category. For example, arterial stiffness better reclassifies CVD risk in individuals aged <50 years than in older individuals.28,215 Echocardiographic left ventricular mass also maintains its added reclassification and discrimination on top of risk scores in young adults (see Section 6 for discussion of risk modifiers).289
Irrespective of cardiovascular risk, all young adults with elevated BP are recommended to follow lifestyle guidance for BP lowering. A discussion about family planning should be taken with young women of childbearing potential at each visit.635,636 Adherence to treatment is low in young adults, <50% in some studies.251 Therefore, communicating the importance of adherence, education, and follow-up clinics is important. (see Sections 7 and 11).
9.2 Pregnancy
9.2.1. Definition and epidemiology Hypertension in pregnancy is typically defined as systolic BP of ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of ≥90 mmHg, measured using repeated BP readings in the office or hospital on two separate occasions or ≥15 min apart in severe hypertension (≥160/110 mmHg).1,637,638 Hypertension in pregnancy is the second leading cause of maternal death after maternal peri-partum haemorrhage.639 Approximately 7% of pregnancies are complicated by hypertension, of which 3% are due to pre-eclampsia and around 1% are chronic or pre-existing hypertension.640 Women with a history of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy are at increased risk of subsequent hypertension and CVD.640–642
9.2.2 Classifying hypertension in pregnancy
Hypertension in pregnancy includes: • Chronic hypertension: precedes pregnancy, develops before 20 weeks of gestation, persists for >6 weeks post-partum, and may be associated with proteinuria. • Gestational hypertension: develops after 20 weeks of gestation and usually resolves within 6 weeks post-partum.
Recommendation Table 21 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in young adults (see Evidence Tables 36 and 37)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Comprehensive screening for the main causes of secondary hypertension is recommended in adults diagnosed with hypertension before the age of 40 years, except for obese young adults where it is recommended to start with an obstructive sleep apnoea evaluation.316,626 I B Since SCORE2 has not been validated for individuals <40 years, screening for HMOD may be considered in such young individuals with elevated BP without other increased CVD risk conditions to identify additional individuals for possible medical treatment.28,215 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3969
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.59
• Antenatally unclassifiable hypertension: BP is first recorded after 20 weeks of gestation, and hypertension is diagnosed but it is unclear if chronic or not; reassessment is necessary 6 weeks post-partum. • Pre-eclampsia: gestational hypertension accompanied by newonset: (i) proteinuria (>0.3 g/day or ≥30 mg/mmol ACR), (ii) other maternal organ dysfunction, including acute kidney injury (serum creatinine ≥ 1 mg/dL), liver dysfunction (elevated transaminases > 40 UI/L with or without right upper quadrant or epigastric abdominal pain), neurological complications (convulsions, altered mental status, blindness, stroke, severe headaches, and persistent visual scotomata), or haematological complications (platelet count < 150 000/μL, disseminated intravascular coagulation, haemolysis), or (iii) uteroplacental dysfunction (such as foetal growth restriction, abnormal umbilical artery Doppler waveform analysis, or stillbirth).643 The only cure for pre-eclampsia is delivery, which is recommended at 37 weeks’ gestation, or earlier in high-risk cases. Of note, proteinuria is not mandatory for diagnosing pre-eclampsia but is present in about 70% of cases.644 Also, as proteinuria may be a late manifestation of pre-eclampsia, it should be suspected when de novo hypertension is accompanied by headache, visual disturbances, abdominal pain, or abnormal laboratory tests, specifically low platelets and/or abnormal liver function. Other potential causes for high BP, including pain and anxiety, must be excluded when treating hypertension during pregnancy.
9.2.3 Measuring blood pressure in pregnancy
See Section 5.5.1 for information on BP measurement approaches in pregnancy.645 It is important to restate here that oscillometric devices tend to under-estimate the true BP and are unreliable in severe preeclampsia; only a few have been validated in pregnancy. Importantly, only the relatively few devices validated for measuring BP in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia should be used (https://stridebp.org).
9.2.4 Investigating hypertension in pregnancy
Basic laboratory investigations include urinalysis, blood count, haematocrit, liver enzymes, serum creatinine, and serum uric acid. Serum uric acid is increased in pre-eclampsia and identifies women at increased risk of adverse maternal and foetal outcomes in hypertensive pregnancies.646 All pregnant women should be assessed for proteinuria in early pregnancy (e.g. 11–14 weeks’ gestation).647 A dipstick test of ≥1+ should prompt further investigations, including ACR, which can be quickly determined in a single spot-urine sample.648 An ACR of <30 mg/mmol (<0.3 mg/mg) can rule out proteinuria.649 Higher values should prompt 24 h urine collection. In one study, 10% of pregnant women with chronic hypertension had secondary hypertension (estimated to affect 0.24% of all pregnancies).650 Secondary hypertension during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes.650 The most common cause of secondary hypertension during pregnancy is CKD. The onset of hypertension during the first trimester, at the peak of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) secretion, should prompt consideration of primary aldosteronism.651 Phaeochromocytoma in pregnant women is rare (0.002% of all pregnancies) but highly morbid.652,653
9.2.5 Preventing hypertension and pre-eclampsia
Low-to-moderate-intensity exercise, especially if supervised and initiated during the first trimester of pregnancy, decreases the incidence of developing gestational hypertension.654 As such, after consultation with their obstetrician, all pregnant women should participate in physical activity, unless contraindicated.655 Factors indicating risk of preeclampsia are discussed in the Supplementary data online.
Women at high or moderate risk of pre-eclampsia should be advised to take 100–150 mg of aspirin daily at bedtime from gestational weeks 12–36.647,656,657 Oral calcium supplementation of 0.5–2 g daily is recommended for preventing pre-eclampsia in women with low dietary intake of calcium (<600 mg daily).658,659
9.2.6 Treatment initiation and blood pressure
targets Acute management of BP in pre-eclampsia and eclampsia is detailed in Section 10.4. Meta-analyses have found no evidence for an increased risk for delivering small-for-gestational-age babies in pregnant women with mild hypertension receiving BP-lowering medications.660 Despite a historical paucity of trial data, previous European guidelines1,89 recommended initiating BP-lowering drug treatment (i) in all women with persistently elevated office BP of ≥150/90 mmHg, and (ii) in women with gestational hypertension (with or without proteinuria), pre-existing hypertension with superimposed gestational hypertension, or hypertension with subclinical HMOD, when office BP is >140/90 mmHg. In the CHAP trial, treating pregnant women with chronic hypertension and BP of ≥140/90 mmHg reduced the occurrence of preeclampsia with severe features, and reduced medically indicated pre-term birth <35 weeks, compared with only treating severe hypertension (BP ≥ 160/105 mmHg).88 Tight BP control (target diastolic BP < 85 mmHg) compared with less-tight BP control (target diastolic BP < 100 mmHg) reduces the incidence of subsequent severe maternal hypertension (BP ≥ 160/110 mmHg), but not foetal or other maternal outcomes in women with mild hypertension at baseline (diastolic BP of 85–105 mmHg).661 Treatment with BP-lowering drugs in all pregnant women with confirmed BP of ≥140/90 mmHg is recommended to reduce the progression to severe hypertension and the related risks for adverse pregnancy outcomes.660,661 In women with pre-existing and gestational hypertension with and without pre-eclampsia, we recommend lowering BP below 140 mmHg for systolic and to 80–90 mmHg for diastolic BP.661 Evidence to support a BP target as low as 120–129/70–79 mmHg is lacking in pregnancy, though such evidence exists for non-pregnant patients receiving BP-lowering medication.
9.2.7 Managing mild hypertension in pregnancy
(office blood pressure 140–159/90–109 mmHg) RAS inhibitors are not recommended in pregnancy due to adverse foetal and neonatal outcomes. The BP-lowering drugs of choice are: betablockers (most data are available for labetalol, a non-selective betablocker that also acts as an alpha-blocker in higher doses; metoprolol and bisoprolol are also considered safe), dihydropyridine CCBs (most data are available for nifedipine, which is generally considered first choice, also felodipine, nitrendipine, amlodipine, and isradipine can be used), and methyldopa.662,663 A meta-analysis suggests that betablockers and CCBs are more effective than methyldopa in preventing severe hypertension.660 Of note, however, atenolol should be avoided, as it is associated with foetal growth restriction.664,665 Methyldopa has been associated with an increased risk of post-partum depression and caution is therefore advised both intra-partum and post-partum.637 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.60
Hydralazine can be particularly effective for severe hypertension in pregnancy and can be administered intravenously in hypertensive admissions (Section 10).666–668 While thiazide diuretics in pregnancy have limited safety data and should be used with caution, other diuretics such as furosemide are not contraindicated and may be necessary in some situations (see Supplementary data online).669
9.2.8 Managing severe hypertension in pregnancy
(>160/110 mmHg) Acute onset of severe hypertension persisting for more than 15 min is considered a hypertensive emergency in pregnancy and is covered in Section 10.4.2.
9.2.9 Managing blood pressure post-partum
For women with hypertension during pregnancy, BP should be measured within 6 h of delivery and, if possible, daily for at least a week after discharge from the hospital.637 Post-partum hypertension is common in the first week and associated with prolonged hospitalization.670 Women with hypertension in pregnancy are at increased risk of chronic hypertension,671 CKD,672 and CVD.177,223,640 The relative risk of chronic hypertension is highest in the first 6 months following delivery, motivating regular screening in these women.673 Women with gestational hypertension, especially those with pre-eclampsia, have higher risk of masked hypertension.674 BP measurements, ideally including out-of-office measurements, urine analyses, and CVD risk assessment, should at least be performed 6–12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months post-partum and, after that, annually. Recent data indicate the potential utility of self-monitoring of BP during the busy early postpartum period.675 All BP-lowering drugs are excreted into breast milk.637 Except for propranolol, atenolol, acebutolol, and nifedipine, most drugs are excreted in very low concentrations in breast milk (see Supplementary data online, Table S11).637
9.2.10 Risk of recurrence of hypertensive disorders
in a subsequent pregnancy About 20%–30% of women with hypertensive disorders in a previous pregnancy will experience recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy.676,677 The earlier the onset of hypertension in the first pregnancy, the higher the risk of recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy.677 Further details on managing hypertension and other cardiovascular disorders in pregnancy are available elsewhere.89,637 9.3. Very old age (≥85 years), frailty, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy 9.3.1. Definition of frailty The most common definition of frailty is an age-associated, biological syndrome characterized by decreased biological reserves, due to dysregulation of several physiological systems.682 This puts an individual at risk when facing physiological stressors, and is associated with poor outcomes, such as disability, hospitalization, and death.683 The estimated prevalence of frailty in people aged >65 years is 7%–16% and is greater in women than in men.684,685 Although the main determinant of frailty is age, chronological age must be differentiated from biological age.686 An older patient can be fit and robust while a multimorbid young patient can be frail. Using multiple drugs may have more unpredictable effects on BP in older patients, because of increased competition for underlying mechanisms responsible for their degradation and elimination, and because the ability of the baro-687 and chemo-reflex688
systems in maintaining a steady treated BP level can decline with ageing. With respect to BP, two issues compound interpretation of the frailty literature. First, frailty on its own is a strong predictor of mortality and cardiovascular complications689 and is accompanied by a decrease in systolic BP.690 This raises the issue of the so-called BP J-curve (see Section 9.8) and reverse causality, with frailty rather than excessive BP lowering being the root cause of adverse health outcomes. Only properly randomized and controlled clinical trials can differentiate between the effects of frailty vs. overly intensive BP-lowering treatment, but unfortunately, few BP-lowering trials have included a substantial proportion of frail patients. Second, there is no consensus on how to grade frailty in day-to-day clinical practice.606 Complex frailty scales exist for application in research,523,691 but unless they are electronically generated,692 they are typically not practical in routine clinical care. Nonetheless, the clinical frailty scale (Figure 21) is intuitive and easy to administer and has been validated against 5-year risk of death.596,693
Recommendation Table 22 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in pregnancy (see Evidence Tables 38–40)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In women with gestational hypertension, starting drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg.661 I B In pregnant women with chronic hypertension, starting drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg.88,660,661,678 I B
Continued In women with chronic and gestational hypertension,
it is recommended to lower BP below 140/90 mmHg but not below 80 mmHg for diastolic BP. I C Dihydropyridine CCBs (preferably extended-release nifedipine), labetalol, and methyldopa are recommended first-line BP-lowering medications for treating hypertension in pregnancy. I C In consultation with an obstetrician, low- to moderate-intensity exercise is recommended in all pregnant women without contraindications to reduce the risk of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia.654,655 I B Systolic BP ≥160 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg in pregnancy can indicate an emergency, and immediate hospitalization should be considered. IIa C HBPM and ABPM should be considered to exclude white-coat and masked hypertension, which are more common in pregnancy.679 IIa C RAS blockers are not recommended during pregnancy.680,681 III B © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; RAS, renin–angiotensin system. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3971
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.61
9.3.2 Randomized controlled trials of blood pressure
lowering in frail older patients Few adults aged ≥85 years have been included in trials.131 In addition, generalizing data from RCTs to very frail patients may not be possible.692,694–697 However, the currently available evidence from RCTs has not demonstrated weakening of the benefits of BP-lowering treatment (i.e. no effect modification) among frailer patients enrolled in these trials, although these participants likely had no more than mild frailty (see Supplementary data online).523,694,698 In the absence of robust randomized evidence, several observational studies have suggested that lowering BP might not be warranted or even be harmful in patients with significant frailty or multimorbidity, particularly when BP is not very high. For instance, a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized studies that investigated associations between BP and risk of mortality in older patients found evidence for interaction by frailty status, suggesting that lowering BP might be harmful in this patient group.699 However, as noted above and in Section 9.8, these observational J-curve findings are unreliable when guiding clinical care, as unidentified biases potentially confound the results. For instance, in addition to reverse causality, stiffness of the large arteries is associated with both low diastolic BP and increased mortality.697 In addition, absolute CVD risk increases with age, indicating that fewer older than younger patients with hypertension may need to be treated to prevent one adverse health outcome.700
Therefore, given the totality of evidence from clinical trials,523,694,701,702 very old and frail patients with hypertension should not be denied the potential benefits of BP-lowering treatment down to a target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg. However, personalized decision-
Very fit 1 People who are robust, active, energetic and motivated. These people commonly exercise regularly. They are among the fittest for their age. Follow BP-lowering treatment guidelines as per
younger cohorts, ensuring
treatment is tolerated Evidence for benefit in CV
event reduction not as strong for people with moderate-to-severe frailty with functional impairment
(poorly represented in
clinical trials)
Evidence for benefits in reducing CVD events with more intensive treatment of
BP Exercise caution and clinical
judgement in beginning and
intensifying BP-lowering treatment, employing a shared decision-making
approach
Low-dose combination therapy to achieve BP control is reasonable Single drug therapy may be
reasonable in this cohort when initiating or maintaining
BP-lowering treatment
ABPM if possible and regular review important, particularly if change in
frailty Monitor for symptomatic
OH, asymptomatic OH with falls, poor treatment tolerance, or medication side effects. Use clinical judgement and APBM/HB- PM to guide deprescribing or medication adjustment
where appropriate
Well 2 People who have no active disease symptoms but are less fit than category I. Often, they exercise or are very active occasionally, e.g, seasonally.
Managing well 3 People whose medical problems are well controlled, but are not regularly active beyond routine walking.
Vulnerable 4 While not dependent on others for daily help, often symptoms limit activities. A common complaint is being "slowed up", and/or being tired during the day.
Mildly frail 5 These people often have more evident slowing, and need help in high order IADLs (finances, transportation, heavy housework, medications). Typically, mild frailty progressively impairs shopping and walking outside alone, meal preparation and housework. Moderately frail 6
People need help with all outside activities and with keeping house. Inside, they often have problems with stairs and need help with bathing and might need minimal assistance cueing (prompting), standing by with dressing.
Severely frail 7 Completely dependent for personal care, from whatever cause (physical or cognitive). Even so, they seem stable and not at high risk of dying (within ~6 months).
Very severely frail 8 Completely dependent, approaching the end of life. Typically, they could not recover even from a minor illness.
Terminally ill 9 Approaching the end of life. This category applies to people with a life expectancy <6 months, who are not otherwise evidently frail.
Clinical Frailty
Scale 1–5 Clinical Frailty
Scale 6–9
Figure 21 Frailty assessment in the management of blood pressure. ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; IADLs, independent activities of daily living; OH, orthostatic hypotension. Adapted from Rockwood et al.693 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.62
making should be a priority in the very old and frail. Together with management of BP, a major consideration should also be whether reversible causes of frailty can be addressed,609 e.g. by treating underlying comorbidities or undergoing supervised muscle-strengthening physiotherapy or supervised exercise and co-ordination and balance training.703
9.3.3 Starting blood pressure-lowering treatment in
very old or frail patients All patients must be fully informed about the benefits and risks of starting BP-lowering treatment, so that their preference is considered. Among 34 hypertension guidelines, 18 recommended 150 mmHg as the systolic goal in frailer and/or older patients, but four endorsed systolic targets <130 mmHg or <120 mmHg.704 Treatment can be started with a long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist.596,705 To achieve BP control, an ACE inhibitor, or if contraindicated, an ARB, can also be used. Thereafter, low-dose thiazides or thiazide-like diuretics are preferred unless there is a specific contraindication, such as gout, orthostatic hypotension, or disturbed micturition (including micturition syncope).596,705 Beta-blockers are less desirable as they reduce heart rate, cause fatigue, and increase the systolic pulse wave amplitude, which is insufficiently buffered in stiff central elastic arteries. Vasodilating beta-blockers and direct vasodilators (e.g. hydralazine and minoxidil) are associated with increased risk of orthostasis. Though data are conflicting,706 alpha-blockers are also considered less desirable as they appear to be associated with an increased risk of orthostasis and falls in very old patients (aged ≥85 years).707,708 Alpha-1 blockers, such as doxazosin, prazosin, terazosin (also used to treat prostate symptoms), are particularly prone to causing orthostasis.98 Once the appropriate combination is found, a combination tablet with variable composition of two agents may optimize adherence. Starting with combination therapy is not advised in most very old and/or frail patients, unless BP is very high.
9.3.4 Maintaining blood pressure lowering in very old
or frail patients If very old and frail patients tolerate BP-lowering treatment well, there is no automatic need to deprescribe or discontinue treatment; however, this should be kept under review. In the case of progressive frailty, systolic BP tends to drop,709 such that deprescription of a BP-lowering drug might become necessary. To identify candidate drugs for deprescribing, a patient’s current medications should be reviewed to identify BP-lowering drugs that may have become contraindicated due to concomitant prescriptions or newly developed comorbidities.705 To help guide deprescription of BP-lowering agents, ABPM can be used to detect orthostatic hypotension or a highly variable BP not buffered by autonomic nervous reflexes.687,688 9.4 Isolated systolic and diastolic
hypertension 9.4.1. Definition of isolated systolic hypertension Isolated systolic hypertension is typically defined as systolic BP of ≥140 mmHg with a diastolic BP of <90 mmHg. While isolated systolic hypertension is uncommon in younger patients,713 it is the most common type of hypertension in older patients; >80% of untreated patients with hypertension aged >60 years have isolated systolic hypertension.714
9.4.2 Isolated systolic hypertension, risk factors, and
ageing Systolic BP increases with age in men and women until the eighth decade of life, while diastolic BP gradually increases up until the fifth or sixth decade of life, after which it either plateaus or decreases. As a result, the pulse pressure (the difference between the systolic and diastolic BP) gradually widens from middle age.34 These BP changes are related to increased aortic stiffening with age.715,716 Since most older patients with hypertension have isolated systolic hypertension, and since with advancing age, risk of CVD events is driven by systolic rather than diastolic BP,717 management of isolated systolic hypertension in older adults is broadly in line with that of combined systolic-diastolic hypertension seen in younger adults.718 Early isolated
Recommendation Table 23 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients who are very old or frail (see Evidence Table 41)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
It is recommended that treatment of elevated BP and hypertension among older patients aged <85 years who are not moderately to severely frail follows the same guidelines as for younger people, provided BP-lowering treatment is well tolerated.131,523,524 I A
Continued It is recommended to maintain BP-lowering drug
treatment lifelong, even beyond the age of 85 years, if well tolerated.523–525 I A Because the benefit in reducing CVD outcomes is uncertain in these settings, and noting that close monitoring of treatment tolerance is advised, BP-lowering treatment should only be considered from ≥140/90 mmHg among persons meeting the following criteria: pre-treatment symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, age ≥85 years, clinically significant moderate-to-severe frailty, and/or limited predicted lifespan (<3 years).131,524,526,527 IIa B As the safety and efficacy of BP treatment is less certain in individuals with moderate or severe frailty, clinicians should consider screening older adults for frailty using validated clinical tests; frail patients’ health priorities and a shared-decision approach should be considered when deciding on BP treatments and targets.523,524,613,710 IIa C When initiating BP-lowering treatment for patients aged ≥85 years, and/or with moderate-to-severe frailty (at any age), long-acting dihydropyridine CCBs or RAS inhibitors should be considered, followed if necessary by low-dose diuretic if tolerated, but preferably not a beta-blocker (unless compelling indications exist) or an alpha-blocker.711 IIa B If BP drops with progressing frailty, deprescription of BP-lowering medications (and other drugs that can reduce BP, such as sedatives and prostate-specific alpha-blockers) may be considered.712 IIb C © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CVD, cardiovascular disease; RAS, renin–angiotensin system. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3973
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.63
systolic hypertension studies used systolic BP treatment targets of 160 or 150 mmHg.718 However, results from the SPRINT and the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trials (mean BP at study entry of 140/78 mmHg and 146/82 mmHg, respectively, indicating that many of the patients had isolated systolic hypertension) confirm that lower systolic BP targets are effective in reducing CVD events in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (see Supplementary data online).135,136 Since relative risk reduction by BP-lowering treatment is homogeneous in any age group, whereas absolute risk reduction is larger with advancing age,131 therapeutic inertia in older patients with isolated systolic hypertension should be avoided (see Section 9.3). As noted earlier, beta-blockers should be avoided in patients with isolated systolic hypertension or more generally with arterial stiffness, as they increase stroke volume (given the lower heart rate).218
9.4.3 Isolated systolic hypertension in young adults
In young adults (<40 years old), the presence of isolated systolic hypertension poses different pathophysiological and clinical considerations. In young patients with isolated systolic hypertension, arterial stiffness713 and relative risk of CVD events624 appear to be similar to those without isolated systolic hypertension and lower than young adults with combined systolic-diastolic hypertension and isolated diastolic hypertension. Indeed, younger patients with isolated systolic hypertension appear to comprise a heterogeneous group.719 For these reasons, it might be reasonable to assess central BP and arterial stiffness in these individuals, as recommended by other scientific societies.720,721 Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended to exclude white-coat hypertension, which is often associated with isolated systolic hypertension in the young.634
9.4.4 Isolated diastolic hypertension
Isolated diastolic hypertension is defined as a systolic BP of <140 mmHg with a diastolic BP of ≥90 mmHg. The isolated diastolic hypertension phenotype is more commonly seen in younger adults and, particularly, younger adults with obesity or other metabolic derangements.722,723 In older adults with this phenotype, consideration should be given to whether the diastolic BP was accurately measured.724 Patients with isolated diastolic hypertension appear to have a slightly increased relative risk for CVD of 5%–30%.548,723,725 However, because patients with isolated diastolic hypertension are younger, they tend to have few events, and very large samples are required to show this association. Furthermore, because the absolute risk for CVD among these individuals is low (typically <10% over 10 years), it is less clear if isolated diastolic hypertension should prompt initiation of BP-lowering medication, particularly among persons in whom baseline systolic BP is already at the target of 120–129 mmHg.723 Irrespective, patients with isolated diastolic hypertension should be followed up, as they are at increased risk for systolic hypertension.723 Finally, it is also worth noting that when a patient achieves a target systolic BP of 120–129 mmHg with BP-lowering treatment, there is little to no high-quality trial evidence that further intensifying BP-lowering medication to achieve both systolic BP of <120 mmHg and also diastolic BP of <70 mmHg improves CVD prognosis.547,723
9.5 Orthostatic hypotension with supine
hypertension Patients with orthostatic hypotension need not be hypotensive and indeed, many have supine elevated BP or supine hypertension. Furthermore, many patients with orthostatic hypotension are asymptomatic. Orthostatic hypotension is present in around 10% of all adults with hypertension and is defined as a drop in BP of ≥20/10 mmHg after rising from either a sitting or lying position to a standing position (see Section 5.5.3).97,99 Assessment for orthostatic hypotension should be timed to occur at 1 and/or 3 min after standing. Because seated to standing assessment can lead to under-detection of orthostatic hypotension, it is preferable, where possible, to test for orthostatic hypotension using a supine (lying) to standing assessment (see Section 5).56,98,726
Assessing for orthostatic hypotension is important in managing adults with elevated BP or hypertension for several reasons. First, findings of trials linking more intensive BP control to improved outcomes may not generalize to patients with orthostatic hypotension, particularly when it is severe in magnitude (standing systolic BP < 110 mmHg97) and/or symptomatic. Second, orthostatic hypotension may be associated with symptoms that may limit the patient’s tolerability of more intensive BP-lowering approaches. Third, orthostatic hypotension may be associated with an increased risk of adverse effects commonly co-attributed to pharmacological BP lowering (such as hospitalizations for hypotension).727 Fourth, orthostatic hypotension is associated with increased risk for CVD.728 However, the frequency of orthostatic hypotension is not increased in the more intensive BP-lowering arms of randomized trials compared with the less intensive BP-lowering arms.726,727,729,730 As such, and in contrast to common belief, it does not appear that more intensive treatment of BP (which almost always requires more BP-lowering medication) worsens orthostatic hypotension. In contrast, there is some evidence that more intensive treatment of hypertension may actually reduce the risk of orthostatic hypotension.730,731 The aetiology of orthostatic hypotension may be considered as neurogenic or non-neurogenic, with the latter being far more common.99 Patients with orthostatic hypotension may have underlying neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, B12 deficiency,732 renal failure, dehydration, prolonged recumbency, deconditioning, and triggering medications (like alpha-blockers, beta-blockers, diuretics, nitrates, antidepressants, and antipsychotics). Of note, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and dihydropyridine CCBs are examples of BP-lowering medications that appear to have less impact on orthostatic hypotension, and their adverse impact, if any, on orthostatic hypotension typically occurs in the first 2 weeks or so after starting or intensifying treatment.733 Managing patients with supine hypertension and orthostatic hypotension is a common clinical conundrum. More detailed reviews on this topic are available elsewhere.98,99 The approach to managing orthostatic hypotension should be non-pharmacological at first. Patients with orthostatic hypotension should be asked to change position slowly, maintain adequate hydration, and avoid alcohol and large meals. Compression stockings, crossing legs while standing, and abdominal binders may also help and should be trialled.734,735 Abdominal heating pads and a head-up bed position can reduce supine (typically nocturnal) hypertension, which may reduce nocturnal diuresis and daytime orthostatic hypotension.736 The treatment of orthostatic hypotension among those with supine hypertension is not to automatically down-titrate BP-lowering medications. Rather, reversible causes should be sought and treated (including discontinuation of offending medications), and patients requiring BP-lowering medication should be switched to BP-lowering medications that are less likely to cause orthostatic hypotension. When symptoms are disabling and the above interventions do not help, particularly in neurogenic orthostatic hypotension, the best evidence exists for midodrine to reverse orthostatic hypotension, and this may be given in conjunction with ongoing BP-lowering medications when supine hypertension exists.99 An alternative option to midodrine is droxidopa, though this is less readily available. Specialist referral is prudent when persons with supine hypertension are prescribed these orthostatic hypotension treatments, as these agents can increase supine BP more than standing BP. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.64
9.6 Diabetes
9.6.1. Diabetes and elevated blood pressure/ hypertension Patients with diabetes (both type 1 and type 2) often have elevated BP or hypertension, and are about twice as likely to suffer a major CVD event over the medium to long term compared with those without diabetes.737 Diabetes is also a major cause of microvascular events, such as retinopathy and nephropathy.738,739 Although the risk of CVD in patients with diabetes varies by screening and diagnostic methods,740,741 as well as with the presence of other CVD risk factors,740,742 on average, patients with diabetes are at ≥10% 10-year risk for CVD. However, formal risk estimation with the use of SCORE2-Diabetes among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients should be considered if they are aged <60 years (see Section 6).164,739
9.6.2 J-shaped curve of blood pressure and risk of
cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes Evidence on the BP threshold and target for treatment in patients with diabetes has been subject to debate. Reports of a J-shaped association between BP and risk of CVD in diabetes,743 and the lack of a clear benefit of treatment on cardiac outcomes at lower BP in some meta-analyses,744–746 has led to some cautious recommendations for intensive treatment in this patient population. An individual patient data meta-analysis by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration tested treatment effects in 103 325 patients with diabetes and provided evidence against effect modification by categories of baseline BP down to a systolic BP of 120 mmHg.445 BP reduction in patients with diabetes is expected to reduce the risk of diabetes-associated complications including retinopathy, vasculopathy, and nephropathy (albuminuria and end-stage renal disease), which adds weight to the importance of reducing BP in these patients (see Supplementary data online).745–747 This task force also considered the fact that a proportion of patients with diabetes have orthostatic hypotension due to diabetic neuropathy,748 which might affect the tolerability of BP lowering. 9.6.3 Managing blood pressure in diabetes
We recommend that all patients with diabetes are offered pharmacological BP-lowering treatment with a BP target of 120–129/70–79 mmHg, if feasible and tolerated.136,146,445,747,749–752 The task force further sees no strong evidence for a differential BP treatment targets in patients with diabetes and those without.136,146,445,746,747 While the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial reported a null primary endpoint for more intensive BP targets in diabetes, stroke was marginally reduced.137 Furthermore, extended follow-up of ACCORD,750 as well as analyses of intensive BP reduction in those randomized to the standard glycaemic arm,749 provide evidence suggesting benefit consistent with the SPRINT, STEP, and Effects of intensive Systolic blood Pressure lowering treatment in reducing RIsk of vascular evenTs (ESPRIT) trials.136,146,545 Overall, all major BP-lowering medication classes are effective in preventing CVD in people with or without diabetes. Of note, however, albuminuria is more common in diabetes and, for this reason, ACE inhibitors and ARBs have potential advantages that may warrant consideration for BP-lowering in patients with diabetes (see Supplementary data online, Table S10).753 Evidence for modifying BP-lowering treatment in patients with pre-diabetes is somewhat limited. Furthermore, the relative effect of BP lowering is relatively consistent across different categories of BMI as a measure of obesity.754,755 It is also noteworthy that elevated BP itself may increase the risk of diabetes,755 emphasizing the potential role of BP lowering in preventing diabetes in addition to preventing CVD. Among the major classes of BP-lowering drugs, ACE inhibitors and ARBs are effective in preventing new-onset diabetes and can be considered in patients at risk of diabetes and who are indicated for BP-lowering therapy.164,755
9.7 Chronic kidney disease
9.7.1. Relationship between hypertension and chronic kidney disease Approximately 850 million people worldwide have CKD, with >80% of them hypertensive, and the prevalence is expected to rise to 1.56 billion
Recommendation Table 24 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with orthostatic hypotension
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Before starting or intensifying BP-lowering medication, it is recommended to test for orthostatic hypotension, by first having the patient sit or lie for 5 min and then measuring BP 1 and/or 3 min after standing.97,99 I B It is recommended to pursue non-pharmacological approaches as the first-line treatment of orthostatic hypotension among persons with supine hypertension. For such patients, it is also recommended to switch BP-lowering medications that worsen orthostatic hypotension to an alternative BP-lowering therapy and not to simply de-intensify therapy.726,727,729,730 I A © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 25 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with diabetes
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In most adults with elevated BP and diabetes, after a maximum of 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office BP ≥130/80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk.445,749 I A BP-lowering drug treatment is recommended for people with pre-diabetes or obesity when confirmed office BP is ≥140/90 mmHg or when office BP is 130–139/80–89 mmHg and the patient is at predicted 10-year risk of CVD ≥10% or with high-risk conditions, despite a maximum of 3 months of lifestyle therapy.445 I A In persons with diabetes who are receiving BP-lowering drugs, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120–129 mmHg, if tolerated.136,146,445,747,749–752 I A © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3975
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.65
by 2025.756–759 The pathogeneses of hypertension and CKD are closely entwined.760 Resistant hypertension, masked hypertension, HMOD, and higher night-time BP are common in patients with CKD.761 CVD is one of the largest contributors to mortality in patients with CKD, with hypertension being a major risk factor.760,762 For the purposes of these guidelines, adults with moderate-to-severe CKD and elevated BP are at sufficiently high risk to be considered for BP-lowering drug therapy as outlined in Section 8 and the Central Illustration (Figure 19). We use Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) categories to define CKD-based risk, and our definition of moderate-to-severe CKD comprises persons with an eGFR of <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and/or albuminuria of ≥30 mg/g (≥3 mg/mmol).19 For persons with mild CKD and elevated BP, a CVD risk assessment should be conducted before deciding on BP-lowering treatment.
9.7.2 Blood pressure lowering in chronic kidney
disease BP lowering in patients with CKD is associated with beneficial effect on CVD events and mortality.275,763–766 BP lowering reduces progression of CKD and the incidence of end-stage renal disease, but this tends to be only in those with significant proteinuria at baseline.766,767
9.7.3 Managing blood pressure in chronic kidney
disease Patients with CKD should receive lifestyle advice, especially regarding reducing sodium intake. Dietary potassium supplementation recommendations are provided in Section 8, with caution required among persons with moderate-to-severe CKD. While exercise appears to have little effect on improving BP in patients with CKD768 or patients on dialysis,769 those with CKD on ACE inhibitor monotherapy have protection against adverse kidney outcomes, CVD events, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death.770,771 Both ACE inhibitors and ARBs reduce the risk of CVD events and kidney failure compared with placebo; however, ACE inhibitors appear to do so with higher probability than ARBs.772,773 Patients with CKD usually require combination therapy, and this should be initiated as a combination of a RAS inhibitor and a CCB or diuretic. In patients with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, an adequately up-titrated loop diuretic is necessary to define resistant hypertension. Chlorthalidone, typically added to a loop diuretic, also effectively lowers BP and reduces microalbuminuria in patients with resistant hypertension with stage 4 CKD (eGFR of 15–30 mL/min/1.73 m2).774 The combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB is not recommended in CKD or any other BP-treatment scenario.
9.7.4 Blood pressure targets in chronic kidney
disease Evidence regarding BP targets in patients with CKD is complex and controversial. The 2021 KDIGO Guideline suggested that adults with elevated BP and CKD be treated to a target systolic BP of <120 mmHg, when tolerated, using standardized office BP measurement (Class of Recommendation IIb).19 This suggestion was based, in part, on the SPRINT trial.545 It should be noted that patients with 24 h urine protein excretion ≥ 1 g/day or eGFR < 20 mL/min/1.73 m2 were excluded from SPRINT. In patients with CKD, after a median follow-up of 3.3 years, the hazard ratio for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome was 0.81 (95% CI 0.63–1.05) and for all-cause death it was 0.72 (95% CI 0.53–0.99). Although intensive BP lowering in SPRINT resulted in greater early decline in eGFR, there was no evidence that this reduction in eGFR attenuated the beneficial effects of the SPRINT intervention on CVD events or death.775
Several systematic reviews have examined the benefit of intensive BP control in patients with CKD (see Supplementary data online). Some have shown no benefit of intensive BP control on renal outcomes,764,767 while others showed lower mortality in intensively treated vs. non-intensively treated patients.275 Highlighting the beneficial effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in persons with CKD776,777 and finerenone in persons with CKD and diabetes460–462,778 is relevant, though these drugs are not currently marketed for BP-lowering effects alone.
9.8 Cardiac disease
9.8.1. Blood pressure thresholds and targets in patients with cardiac disease Recommended BP thresholds for initiating BP-lowering therapy and recommended BP targets in patients receiving therapy are provided in Sections 6 and 8. All patients with a history of CVD (including coronary artery disease) are at increased risk of recurrent CVD. As such, these patients are recommended to be treated with BP-lowering therapy for confirmed baseline BP of ≥130/80 mmHg and the recommended treatment target BP of 120–129/70–79 mmHg, provided treatment is tolerated (see Sections 6 and 8). As stated in Section 8, it should be remembered that a systolic BP of 120 mmHg (especially by out-of-office assessment) is likely the optimal point in the target range recommended in these guidelines. In addition to considering patients with known CVD at sufficiently high risk for more intensive BP treatment targets, the
Recommendation Table 26 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with chronic kidney disease
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In patients with diabetic or non-diabetic moderate-to-severe CKD and confirmed BP ≥130/ 80 mmHg, lifestyle optimization and BP-lowering medication are recommended to reduce CVD risk, provided such treatment is well tolerated.275,766 I A In adults with moderate-to-severe CKD who are receiving BP-lowering drugs and who have eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m2, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120–129 mmHg, if tolerated. Individualized BP targets are recommended for those with lower eGFR or renal transplantation.274,779 I A In hypertensive patients with CKD and eGFR >20 mL/min/1.73 m2, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve outcomes in the context of their modest BP-lowering properties.776,777 I A ACE inhibitors or ARBs are more effective at reducing albuminuria than other BP-lowering agents and should be considered as part of the treatment strategy for patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria or proteinuria.780–782 IIa B © ESC 2024
ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease, eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; SGLT2, sodium–glucose co-transporter 2. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.66
task force considers patients with both severe valvular heart disease and symptomatic heart failure to also be at sufficiently high risk. We also note that, whether used for angina control or BP control, a betablocker should not be combined with a non-dihydropyridine CCB.
9.8.2 Coronary artery disease with particular
reference to the blood pressure J-curve Important considerations in patients with coronary artery disease are: (i) the BP J-curve (an observation suggesting that over-intensive BP lowering may increase CVD risk in some patients), and (ii) compelling indications for specific classes of BP-lowering medications. The J-curve phenomenon describes increased risk for CVD observed among patients with the lowest and highest BP in the dataset, with the best CVD outcome rates typically observed among those with BP in the normal range (e.g. systolic BP of 100–120 mmHg and diastolic BP of 60–80 mmHg). For this reason, the J-curve is sometimes also called the U-curve, with both terms typically used interchangeably.697,783,784 However, observational data do not consistently demonstrate a BP J-curve with CVD risk.697 It is more commonly observed among patients with established clinical CVD, such as those with coronary artery disease, or in secondary prevention cohorts.785,786 Furthermore, the J-curve is more commonly observed when analysing diastolic BP values vs. systolic BP values, though it has been described for both.114,697 This stronger relationship with diastolic BP has informed the hypothesis that the J-curve may be caused by reduced perfusion of major organs at low BP, which is particularly operative for diastolic BP in the coronary vasculature when considering ischaemic heart disease events (since coronary blood flow is largely confined to diastole).786,787 If excessive lowering of BP causes CVD events, this needs to be addressed in treatment recommendations provided by BP management guidelines. The 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension introduced, for the first time, lower bounds of BP-lowering treatment targets, implying that treatment be de-intensified for patients with on-treatment BP below these bounds (i.e. <120 mmHg systolic or <70 mmHg diastolic).1 The 2023 ESH document also makes this argument.788 However, since 2018, compelling evidence has demonstrated that the BP J-curve evident in observational datasets is highly unlikely to reflect a causal process and can instead be attributed to residual confounding and/or reverse causation.33,114,115,546,697,789–793 Accordingly, while low BP can indicate a high-risk state, particularly among older adults and those with comorbidities, there is no evidence that this is a causal phenomenon. Indeed, if there is another indication for BP-lowering therapy (e.g. in a patient with wide pulse pressure and a baseline systolic BP of >140 mmHg but diastolic BP of <60 mmHg), the evidence suggests that such therapy should be provided if tolerated to reduce CVD risk. There is a limit to how low BP can be treated without potentially tipping the scales in favour of CVD harm vs. CVD benefit. However, it is not clear what that limit is and how much it differs based on comorbidities. Currently, the data do not suggest that risk for CVD can be causally increased by treating any patient to the recommended intensive BP target outlined in these guidelines of as low as 120/70 mmHg. We also do not recommend stopping or de-intensifying BP-lowering medication among asymptomatic patients with on-treatment BP of <120/70 mmHg. It should be recognized, though, that there are no robust data demonstrating that an on-treatment systolic BP of <90 mmHg or an on-treatment diastolic BP of <50 mmHg is safe from a CVD perspective and there is clear potential for harm. Furthermore, it must be emphasized that the above discussion of the BP J-curve relates solely to CVD risk and does not consider the known non-CVD side effects of BP-lowering drugs, like, e.g. orthostatic hypotension, syncope, and renal injury. We do know that patients treated to a more intensive BP target of 120/70 mmHg are at increased risk for these side effects,550
which is why these guidelines stress that this more intensive target should only be pursued among those in whom treatment is being tolerated (Section 8). The second consideration in managing BP in patients with coronary artery disease is the recommended use of BP-lowering medications with compelling indications based on outcomes trials that demonstrated CVD outcomes benefits in the setting of coronary artery disease. These recommendations are provided in the recommendation table below.
9.8.3 Valvular heart disease
Most patients with both severe heart valve disease and heart failure, defined by the 2021 ESC/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease,794 can be considered at increased risk of CVD. Accordingly, it is recommended they are treated with BP-lowering therapy for confirmed baseline BP of >130/80 mmHg, and their recommended target of treatment is BP of 120–129/70–79 mmHg, provided treatment is tolerated. Persons with mild-to-moderate heart valve disease should have a CVD risk assessment prior to deciding their BP-lowering treatment threshold and target. Vasodilating ARBs/ACE inhibitors are preferable over vasodilating dihydropyridine CCBs because of the link between valvular heart disease and subsequent heart failure and given the stronger efficacy evidence for ARBs/ACE inhibitors in the setting of heart failure once manifested.795 In aortic valve stenosis, concomitant hypertension influences both the aortic root, the aortic valve, and the left ventricular structure and function.796 In this subgroup, treatment preferably with ARBs/ACE inhibitors should be considered. A beta-blocker may be added if BP remains >140/90 mmHg.796,797
9.8.4 Heart failure
Patients with symptomatic heart failure are at increased risk of CVD. Therefore, it is recommended that these patients are treated with BP-lowering therapy for confirmed baseline BP of >130/80 mmHg and their recommended treatment target is BP of 120–129/70–79 mmHg, provided treatment is tolerated and with out-of-office confirmation of on-treatment BP. Of note, many patients with systolic heart failure on maximal heart failure therapies have BP of <120/70 mmHg, and we do not recommend de-intensifying such treatment unless indicated by symptomatic side effects. Besides referencing the new evidence for ARNi and SGLT2 inhibitor therapies,795 our 2024 recommendations for heart failure are largely unchanged from the 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension. Non-dihydropyridine CCBs should not be used in heart failure. Frailty and hypotension risk should be assessed in older heart failure patients being considered for ARNi and SGLT2 inhibitor therapies, and older patients should be closely followed to ensure they are tolerating such treatments. For more information on the management of heart failure, we direct readers to the latest ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure.798
ESC Guidelines 3977
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.67
9.8.5 Heart rhythm disease (including AF)
Not all patients with heart rhythm disease, including those with AF, are at increased risk for CVD and, as such, the management of BP among patients with heart rhythm disease should be the same as for the general adult population.443 However, there is a close relationship between increased BP and AF risk, hence, ensuring good BP control is important.801,802 Management of heart rhythm disorders should follow recommendations in guidelines specific to these conditions.803
9.9 Chronic cerebrovascular disease
and/or cognitive impairment 9.9.1. Role of hypertension in chronic cerebrovascular disease Hypertension is a risk factor for chronic cerebrovascular disease through its direct effects on brain structure and microvasculature. This manifests as transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and stroke in the acute setting, but chronic hypertension can lead to covert stroke and white-matter ischaemic change over time, resulting in cognitive decline and progressive vascular dementia.804–808 Hypertension is also associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease,809 and is a risk factor for developing AF, heart failure, and CKD, all of which are associated with increased risk of developing cognitive impairment and dementia.810–813 For the purposes of these guidelines, adults with a history of stroke or TIA and elevated BP are considered at sufficiently high risk to be considered for BP-lowering drug therapy as outlined in Section 8 and the Central Illustration (Figure 19).
9.9.2 Treatment in patients with history of prior
stroke or transient ischaemic attack In patients with a prior history of TIA and ischaemic stroke, BP-lowering treatment reduces the risk of any recurrent stroke by 20%.814–817 The aetiology of stroke can affect the degree of risk reduction with pharmacological treatment, with greater reductions observed for intracerebral haemorrhage and lacunar ischaemic stroke syndromes.818–820 Most prior guidelines recommend an intensive BP target in patients with a prior history of stroke, typically using combination treatment (ACE inhibitor/ARB plus either a calcium channel antagonist or a thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic), with therapy commencing immediately after TIA and within a few days of ischaemic stroke (see Supplementary data online and see Section 10.3 for acute BP management during hospitalization for stroke).814,815,821–824 Regimens containing an ACE inhibitor and thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic may be superior to beta-blockers in terms of stroke risk reduction.825,826 Regarding intensive BP control after stroke, typically targeting a systolic BP of <130 mmHg, individual trials were somewhat inconclusive, but a meta-analysis showed a reduced risk of recurrent stroke of 22% in the intensive treatment group randomized to a target systolic BP as low as 120 mmHg.543,824,827,828 Caveats to this recommendation would be for frail patients, who have a much higher rate of stroke and recurrent stroke than the general population, and who are more sensitive to adverse effects of BP-lowering agents (see Section 9.3).596,606,607,829
9.9.3 Treatment in patients with chronic
cerebrovascular disease and cognitive impairment Treatment of hypertension represents a key mechanism for reducing the global burden of dementia at the population level.830 Epidemiological studies have reported associations between mid-life hypertension and development of cognitive decline in later life, with, e.g. mid-life hypertension increasing relative risk of lifetime dementia by 20%–54%.831–837 In one observational meta-analysis, an increased risk for dementia emerged with systolic BP of >130 mmHg.831 Evidence for lowering BP to reduce the risk of dementia is limited due to heterogeneity in populations studied, cognitive testing methods used, and the varied use of dementia or cognitive impairment or both as a primary outcome.838,839 Findings from individual studies have mixed results (see Supplementary data online).264,839–843 Studies on effects of BP-lowering treatment on white-matter intensities concluded that patients in the intensive-control arm had less white-matter intensity accumulation than in the standard-treatment arm.841,844 Studies in which people with stroke and TIA were included reported a reduced risk of dementia and cognitive decline for the active-treatment group, but a mixed signal for dementia alone.841,845 However, individual studies
Recommendation Table 27 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with cardiac disease
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In patients with a history of myocardial infarction who require BP-lowering treatment, beta-blockers and RAS blockers are recommended as part of that treatment.538 I A In patients with symptomatic angina who require BP-lowering treatment, beta-blockers and/or CCBs are recommended as part of that treatment.538 I A In patients with symptomatic HFrEF/HFmrEF, the following treatments with BP-lowering effects are recommended to improve outcomes: ACE inhibitors (or ARBs if ACE inhibitors are not tolerated) or ARNi, beta-blockers, MRAs, and SGLT2 inhibitors.795 I A In hypertensive patients with symptomatic HFpEF, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve outcomes in addition to their modest BP-lowering properties.795 I A In patients with a history of aortic valve stenosis and/ or regurgitation who require BP-lowering treatment, RAS blockers should be considered as part of that treatment.794,796 IIa C In patients with a history of moderate-to-severe mitral valve regurgitation who require BP-lowering treatment, RAS blockers should be considered as part of that treatment.794 IIa C In patients with symptomatic HFpEF who have BP above target, ARBs and/or MRAs may be considered to reduce heart failure hospitalizations and reduce BP.795,799,800 IIb B © ESC 2024
ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; ARNi, angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HF(m)rEF, heart failure with (mildly) reduced ejection fraction; MRA, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; SGLT2, sodium–glucose co-transporter 2. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.68
may have been under-powered and more recent meta-analyses do convincingly support efficacy in reducing dementia with BP-lowering treatment.610,611 Indeed, these meta-analyses reported a reduced risk of incident dementia or cognitive impairment with BP lowering of 7%–13%.610,611 While one trial suggested superiority of long-acting CCBs,264 it is unclear if any first-line BP-lowering agent is preferable for preventing dementia and cognitive impairment.846,847 The role of competing risk mechanisms including orthostatic hypotension848 and BP variability849 may be important factors in treatment decisions for people with frailty, multimorbidity, and/or chronic cerebrovascular disease.
9.10 Aortopathy
9.10.1. Coarctation of the aorta Aortic coarctation is associated with CVD in the long term, even following early surgical or percutaneous treatment. The most common complications are associated with hypertension, which is common in aortic coarctation. When aortic coarctation is not treated, patients often develop severe hypertension and HMOD (especially LVH and left ventricular dysfunction, aortopathy, and cerebrovascular complications).850–852 No formal RCTs to define optimal medical treatment of hypertension in aortic coarctation have been conducted, therefore, patients not suitable for, or having undergone, intervention should be treated for hypertension following the core algorithm for the general population.
9.10.2 Bicuspid aortic valve-related aortopathy
Bicuspid aortic valve is the most common congenital heart disease and is sometimes associated with aortopathy or aortic coarctation. Bicuspid aortic valve disease is associated with an increased risk of valve malfunction and adverse aortic events.853,854 This risk is exacerbated by hypertension. Beyond aortic dilation and aneurysm formation, bicuspid aortic valve disease is also a risk factor for aortic dissection and rupture.855 Blood pressure should be carefully monitored and controlled.856
9.10.3 Preventing aortic dilation and dissection in
high-risk patients A modest dilatation of the ascending aorta or aortic root is often associated with chronic hypertension and HMOD. An additional cause of aortopathy (bicuspid valve, coarctation, Marfan or other syndromes) should be considered in more severe cases.857 Patients with aortic dilatation should have their BP optimally controlled following the core algorithm for the general hypertension population.
In patients with Marfan syndrome, prophylactic use of ARBs, ACE inhibitors, or beta-blockers may reduce complications or progression of aortic dilation.857–860 More information is available in the 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of peripheral arterial and aortic diseases.861
9.11 Different ethnic groups
Influx and settlement of migrant populations in Europe have contributed to regional population growth and changes in its composition.862 Ethnic minority populations are disproportionally affected by hypertension and hypertension-mediated complications, compared with historically native Europeans, with data suggesting migrant women are particularly vulnerable.536,863 In particular, hypertension is more prevalent in those of African descent.863,864 The predominant group of European black ethnicity originates from sub-Saharan Africa,863 but specific studies on the management and control of hypertension in this population are lacking, and data are often extrapolated from studies in the African American population.864 This assumption requires caution, as differences likely exist between these populations in terms of CVD risk, economic, and sociological status,865,866 as well as responses to BP-lowering drugs.867 Black patients have a greater prevalence of low-renin, salt-sensitive hypertension and may be more predisposed to HMOD than white patients, possibly in part due to increased vascular stiffness.864,868,869 Salt restriction, thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics, and CCBs appear particularly useful in black patients with hypertension, whereas RAS blocker monotherapy may be less effective.870–873 If combination therapy is needed, in a recent RCT conducted in sub-Saharan African countries, amlodipine plus either hydrochlorothiazide or perindopril proved to be equally effective and superior, respectively, to hydrochlorothiazide plus perindopril.874 When RAS blockers are used in combination therapy, ARBs may be preferable to ACE inhibitors, as angioedema appears more common with ACE inhibitors in black patients. Despite some recent progress,875 data on hypertension epidemiology and management in European immigrant patients are still lacking.863,875–877
9.12 Nocturnal hypertension
9.12.1. Definition Nocturnal hypertension is defined as night-time BP of >120 mmHg systolic and/or >70 mmHg diastolic by 24 h ABPM. Nocturnal hypertension can occur as day–night sustained hypertension or isolated nocturnal hypertension (daytime BP < 135/85 mmHg on 24 h ABPM). Physiologically, BP is
Recommendation Table 28 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with chronic cerebrovascular disease and cognitive impairment
Recommendations Classa Levelb
It is recommended that the BP-lowering drug treatment strategy for preventing recurrent stroke should comprise a RAS blocker plus a CCB or a thiazide-like diuretic.820,823,825,826 I A In patients with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg with a history of TIA or stroke a systolic BP target of 120– 129 mmHg is recommended to reduce CVD outcomes, provided treatment is tolerated.824,827,828 I A © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CVD, cardiovascular disease; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; TIA, transient ischaemic attack. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 29 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in different ethnic groups
Recommendation Classa Levelb
In black patients from Sub-Saharan Africa who require BP-lowering treatment, combination therapy including a CCB combined with either a thiazide diuretic or a RAS blocker should be considered.874 IIa B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; RAS, renin–angiotensin system. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3979
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.69
expected to decrease during sleep by 10%–20% relative to daytime BP.878 Night-time dipping patterns are classified into four groups:879,880 • Inverse dipping (riser): nocturnal increase in BP (night-to-day ratio of >1.0). • Non-dipper: reduced night-time BP dip of <10% (or night-to-day ratio of >0.9 and ≤1.0). • Normal dipping: fall in night-time BP of >10% and <20% (or night-to-day ratio of 0.8 to 0.9). • Extreme dipping: marked fall in night-time BP of >20% (or night-to-day ratio of <0.8). Patients with nocturnal hypertension may be dippers or non-dippers. Of note, the long-term reproducibility of dipping patterns appears to be low.881,882
9.12.2 Epidemiology
Nocturnal hypertension has been observed in up to half of patients with hypertension,883–886 and is associated with increased HMOD,883 impaired renal function, and diabetes mellitus.887 Nocturnal hypertension appears to be more prevalent in black888–890 and Asian891,892 populations. Masked uncontrolled hypertension, which occurs in 30% of patients treated for hypertension, is more often due to poorly controlled nocturnal BP than daytime BP on ABPM.893 Environmental factors, including sleep duration and higher humidity,894 nocturia,895 OSAS,896 obesity, high salt intake in salt-sensitive patients,897 orthostatic hypotension, autonomic dysfunction, CKD,898–900 diabetic neuropathy/diabetes,901 and old age62 are associated with nondipping. Moreover, nocturnal hypertension and absent night-time dipping pattern are more common in secondary hypertension.902,903
9.12.3 Night-time blood pressure as a cardiovascular
disease risk factor Nocturnal hypertension is a risk factor for adverse CVD events,904 cerebrovascular disease, including stroke,905 and cardiovascular mortality.891,906,907 Night-time BP may provide more prognostic information than daytime BP, perhaps as it is less dependent on physical activities. Non-dipping908–910 and reverse dipping (nocturnal rise in BP) may also be associated with increased CVD risk.62,910–913 A nocturnal rise in BP is associated with an increased risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease in older men.914 There is also some evidence that extreme dipping, particularly in untreated patients, is associated with an increased risk for CVD events.35,886
9.12.4 Treatment of nocturnal hypertension
There is no reliable evidence that BP-lowering medication should be routinely dosed at bedtime. The diurnal timing of drug administration is discussed in Section 8.3.4. In patients with secondary hypertension, the underlying cause (OSAS, primary aldosteronism) should be treated as discussed in Section 9.14.
9.13 Resistant hypertension
9.13.1. Definition of resistant hypertension Resistant hypertension is defined as BP remaining above goal despite three or more BP-lowering drugs of different classes at maximally tolerated doses, of which one is a diuretic (Table 11).915 Resistant hypertension should be managed at specialized centres with the expertise and resources to exclude pseudo-resistant hypertension (adherence testing) and causes of secondary hypertension.916 9.13.2 Non-pharmacological interventions
The Treating Resistant Hypertension Using Lifestyle Modification to Promote Health (TRIUMPH) trial demonstrated significant clinic and ambulatory BP reductions in patients with resistant hypertension participating in a 4-month lifestyle intervention comprising diet and exercise interventions delivered within a cardiac rehabilitation programme.917
9.13.3 Pharmacological interventions
BP-lowering treatment of resistant hypertension with single-pill combinations is recommended to reduce the pill burden, thereby increasing drug adherence and persistence.492 As resistant hypertension often, and especially in CKD,918 represents a state of salt retention and volume expansion secondary to relative aldosterone excess,516,919,920 BP control may be improved by switching hydrochlorothiazide to long-acting thiazide-like diuretics, such as chlorthalidone.921,922 However, a recent trial of chlorthalidone vs. hydrochlorothiazide—which probably included a sizeable proportion of adults with resistant hypertension—did not demonstrate any difference in systolic BP or CVD outcomes between the two medications. In the subgroup of patients with prior CVD, there was a strong trend of benefit with chlorthalidone on CVD outcomes.447 Of note, the risk of hypokalaemia was higher in the chlorthalidone group than in the hydrochlorothiazide group.447 In patients with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, an adequately uptitrated loop diuretic is necessary to define resistant hypertension. Most patients with resistant hypertension require the addition of non-first-line BP-lowering drugs (Figure 22). Of these, low-dose spironolactone (25–50 mg daily) should be considered first.459,515,923–925 In patients with resistant hypertension and type 2 diabetes, spironolactone (25–50 mg daily) reduced BP and albuminuria.926 The use of spironolactone can be precluded by limited tolerability due to anti-androgenic side effects resulting in breast tenderness or gynaecomastia (in about 6%), impotence in men, and menstrual irregularities in women.927 The efficacy and safety of spironolactone for treating resistant hypertension have not yet been established in patients with significant renal impairment. Moreover, spironolactone, especially in addition to RAS inhibitors, increases the risk of hyperkalaemia.927,928 Therefore, spironolactone should be restricted to patients with an eGFR of ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and a plasma potassium concentration of ≤4.5 mmol/L.459 Steroidal MRAs are contraindicated in patients with an eGFR of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Serum electrolytes and kidney function should be monitored soon after initiation and frequently thereafter. In patients with resistant hypertension and CKD (eGFR of 25–45 mL/min/1.73 m2), the oral potassium binder patiromer enabled more patients to continue treatment with spironolactone.929 If spironolactone is not tolerated due to anti-androgen side effects, eplerenone may be used. If eplerenone is used, higher doses (i.e. 50–200 mg daily) and twice-daily dosing may be necessary to achieve a BP-lowering effect.503 Of note, eplerenone is not licensed for hypertension treatment in many countries. When not already prescribed for a compelling indication, betablockers should be considered in the treatment of resistant hypertension, though their BP-lowering effects appear to be less potent than spironolactone in the setting of resistant hypertension.459 Amiloride and clonidine have data suggesting they are as effective as spironolactone for BP lowering, though they lack outcomes data. A non-exhaustive list of additional medications sometimes used for BP-lowering purposes includes other centrally acting BP-lowering medications (e.g. methyldopa), hydralazine, aliskiren, minoxidil, triamterene, and loop diuretics (Figure 22).515,516 As noted earlier, minoxidil use is often limited by side effects. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.70
9.13.4 Devices for blood pressure lowering
Several devices have been investigated for treating resistant hypertension. Of these, the most evidence is available for catheter-based renal denervation. As discussed in Section 8.6.1, several randomized, sham-controlled trials have been published, demonstrating a BP-lowering efficacy over 24 h for radiofrequency and ultrasound renal denervation in a broad spectrum of hypertension, including resistant hypertension.568,585 Other devices are still under investigation and are not recommended for routine use in clinical practice (Section 8.6.2).
Intensification of pharmacotherapy
If BP remains uncontrolled Renal denervation
Interventional
therapy Shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment
Beta-blocker (if not already recommended for a compelling indication)
Spironolactone If spironolactone is not tolerated: eplerenone
True treatment-resistant hypertension
Office BP 140/90 mmHg despite 3 or more BP-lowering medications
at maximally tolerated doses, including a diuretic
Referral to hypertension centre should be considered
Treatment optimization of BP-lowering medications (ideally three-drug SPC) Exclusion of secondary and pseudo-resistant hypertension
Alpha blockers Centrally acting BP-lowering drugs
K+ sparing diuretics Others (Class IIa)
(Class IIa) (Class IIb)
(Class IIa)
(Class IIa)
Figure 22 Management of resistant hypertension. BP, blood pressure; K+, potassium; SPC, single-pill combination.
Recommendation Table 30 — Recommendations for treating resistant hypertension (see Evidence Tables 42 and 43)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
In patients with resistant hypertension and uncontrolled BP despite use of first-line BP lowering therapies, the addition of spironolactone to existing treatment should be considered.459,515 IIa B
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3981
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.71
9.14 Management of specific causes
of secondary hypertension 9.14.1. General considerations These guidelines will describe only the general principles of managing the most common forms of secondary hypertension. For the rarer forms of secondary hypertension, patients should be referred to specialized hypertension centres. By definition, secondary hypertension should be, for the most part, cured when the underlying cause has been unambiguously identified and removed. However, in clinical practice, this is not always the case. Vascular remodelling, a common feature of a delayed diagnosis of secondary hypertension, affects renal function and can account for residual high BP in some patients with secondary hypertension. The rate of cure is higher when the diagnosis is made early in the course of the disease. Most common forms of secondary hypertension are listed in Table 13.
9.14.2 Primary aldosteronism
Primary aldosteronism (Conn syndrome) is the most common form of secondary hypertension. The management of primary aldosteronism depends on its subtype, particularly on adrenal lesions being unilateral or bilateral, because the unilateral forms are amenable to surgical treatment while the latter require lifelong medical treatment. In sporadic forms, unilateral primary aldosteronism is distinguished from bilateral primary aldosteronism by adrenal vein sampling or functional imaging with radiolabelled tracers.930–932 In the much less common familial forms (necessitating a family history be taken), genetic testing for germline mutations is necessary.933 For unilateral primary aldosteronism, surgical removal of the offending adrenal gland is typically considered, unless the patient is older or has comorbidities of concern. Surgery is not an option for bilateral primary aldosteronism. Medical treatment is currently based on MRAs. Among MRAs, spironolactone is the most widely available. The effective dose, usually 50–100 mg once daily, can be titrated up to 300–400 mg once daily, if necessary. Eplerenone is also used and, despite being less potent than spironolactone and requiring twice-daily administration, it has the advantage of causing less gynaecomastia and erectile dysfunction in men.934 Newer agents, such as the non-steroidal MRAs finerenone and exarenone, and the aldosterone synthase inhibitor baxdrostat, which lower BP in resistant hypertension,326,474 are also being tested for treating primary aldosteronism. Of the familial forms, only glucocorticoid-remediable primary aldosteronism, now reclassified as familial hyperaldosteronism type 1, can be corrected with dexamethasone,935 usually with low doses that are free of glucocorticoid effects and can be safely used during pregnancy.936 For detailed information, readers are referred to the latest primary aldosteronism guidelines.328,329
9.14.3 Renovascular hypertension
Patients with RVH should receive medical therapy to reduce BP in the first instance. Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) without stenting is the treatment of choice for fibromuscular dysplasia, and can restore renal perfusion pressure and lower BP.937 When this is not feasible, RAS blockers are the drugs of choice for treatment, but they require careful monitoring of renal function over time, as they can cause acute renal failure in those with tight bilateral stenoses or a stenosed solitary functioning kidney. Possible involvement of the carotid, coronary, and other major arteries, possibly leading to dissection if BP is not controlled, should also be considered, as fibromuscular dysplasia is now recognized as a systemic disease affecting multiple vascular beds. Patients with significant atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis are at very high risk of CVD and renal events. It is recommended that PTRA and stenting are performed in experienced centres due to the high risk of restenosis. Unfortunately, though these studies did not solely recruit patients with true significant atherosclerotic RVH, publication of some null trials938,939 have decreased the enthusiasm for investigating atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. This could result in more uncontrolled hypertension, recurrent flash pulmonary oedema (Pickering syndrome), and worsening renal function ultimately leading to endstage renal disease.940
In patients with resistant hypertension in whom spironolactone is not effective or tolerated, treatment with eplerenone instead of spironolactone,503 or the addition of a beta-blocker if not already indicated459 and, next, a centrally acting BP-lowering medication,515 an alpha-blocker,515 hydralazine, or a potassium-sparing diuretic516 should be considered. IIa B To reduce BP, and if performed at a medium-to-high volume centre, catheter-based renal denervation may be considered for resistant hypertension patients who have BP that is uncontrolled despite a three BP-lowering drug combination, and who express a preference to undergo renal denervation after a shared risk-benefit discussion and multidisciplinary assessment.564,566–568,586–590 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 31 — Recommendations for managing hypertension in patients with renovascular hypertension (see Evidence Tables 44 and 45)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Renal artery angioplasty without stenting should be considered for patients with hypertension and haemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis due to fibromuscular dysplasia.941 IIa C Renal artery angioplasty and stenting may be considered in patients with haemodynamically significant, atherosclerotic, renal artery stenosis (stenosis of 70%–99%, or 50%–69% with post-stenotic dilatation and/or significant trans-stenotic pressure gradient) with: • Recurrent heart failure, unstable angina, or sudden
onset flash pulmonary oedema despite maximally tolerated medical therapy; • Resistant hypertension; • Hypertension with unexplained unilaterally small kidney or CKD; • Bilateral renal artery stenosis or unilateral renal
artery stenosis in a solitary viable kidney.942,943 IIb C
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.72
9.14.4 Phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma
Phaeochromocytomas are rare adrenal tumours that secrete catecholamines and are present in <0.2% of patients with hypertension. A small percentage (<10%) of catecholamine-producing tumours are extraadrenal and are derived from sympathetic and non-sympathetic nerves. More than 35% of the non-syndromic PPGLs are due to germline mutations.338 These mutations should be screened for because, when found, they can drive management of the proband and the family and also inform the choice of functional imaging. Moreover, some germline mutations, such as those involving succinate dehydrogenase B, carry a risk of malignant adrenal tumours.301,336 Sympathetic PPGLs are usually secreting and present with chronic, episodic, or labile hypertension. Adrenergic crises cause hypertensive emergencies and should be treated with an intravenous (i.v.) alpha-1-blocker, such as phentolamine, doxazosin or terazosin, or labetalol. When given i.v. (1–2 mg/kg) twice weekly as a bolus over 1 min followed by a continuous infusion, labetalol also has alphablocker properties and has the advantage of allowing titration of the infusion based on the BP response, and avoids tachycardia via beta-blockade. Identifying a single tumour mandates surgical excision after adequate pharmacological preparation, because secreting PPGLs can cause fatal events with no warning. Administering doxazosin or terazosin, followed by a beta-blocker, usually controls BP and adrenergic crises. As PPGLs are associated with a redistribution of volume from the periphery to the cardiopulmonary system,944 patients with PPGLs have peripheral hypovolaemia that exposes them to the risk of profound hypotension, particularly right after tumour excision. Therefore, adequate fluid administration should be carefully managed.
9.14.5 Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome
The management of this prevalent condition should be driven by the result of a polysomnography study, which should provide the value of the AHI (the average number of episodes per hour) and the sleep position in which apnoeic–hypopnoeic episodes occur. For mild OSAS (AHI < 15), weight loss and advice on sleep hygiene are usually sufficient. For moderate (AHI of 15–30) and severe (AHI > 30) OSAS, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is indicated and usually improves BP control and helps to resolve resistant hypertension. If CPAP is not tolerated, the site of upper airway obstruction should be determined by an Ear, Nose, and Throat evaluation with drug-induced sleep endoscopy as a potential step to corrective surgery. 9.14.6 Drug-induced hypertension
Over-the-counter medications, prescribed drugs, and drug abuse (recreational substances and misuse of drugs) can cause hypertension (Supplementary data online, Table S4).
9.14.6.1 Anticancer drug-induced hypertension
Growing evidence indicates that, while contemporary anticancer and anti-angiogenic drugs improve cancer survival, they can also cause hypertension (Supplementary data online, Table S4). This is especially evident in patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, in whom BP increases in 80%–90%.945 Tyrosine kinase inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors also increase BP, as do adjuvant therapies (corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and anti-androgen hormone therapy). Hypertension caused by anticancer drugs is often dose limiting and may be reversible after therapy interruption or discontinuation. Evidence-based clinical trials specifically addressing patients who develop hypertension due to cancer therapy are lacking. It is recommended that management of hypertension in these patients follows that for the general population.945,946 Managing these complex patients requires multidisciplinary healthcare involving oncologists, hypertension specialists, cardiologists, and nephrologists,945,946 as highlighted in the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology.946
9.14.7 Other forms of secondary hypertension
Other forms of secondary hypertension, such as genetic causes of hypertension (Liddle’s syndrome, glucocorticoid-remediable aldosteronism), excess liquorice, Cushing’s syndrome, thyroid disease, hyperparathyroidism, aortic coarctation, and acromegaly are rare. Affected patients should be referred to specialized centres for treatment.
10 Acute and short-term lowering
of blood pressure
10.1 Acute blood pressure management in
hypertensive emergencies 10.1.1. Definition and characteristics of hypertensive emergencies Hypertensive emergency is defined as BP of ≥180/110 mmHg (see Figure 10) associated with acute HMOD, often in the presence of symptoms. Hypertensive emergencies are potentially life-threatening and require immediate and careful intervention to reduce BP, often with i.v. therapy. Symptoms of hypertensive emergency depend on the organs affected but may include headache, visual disturbances, chest pain, shortness of breath, dizziness, and other neurological deficits. In patients with hypertensive encephalopathy, somnolence, lethargy, tonic–clonic seizures, and cortical blindness may precede a loss of consciousness; however, focal neurological lesions are rare and should raise the suspicion of stroke. As outlined in Section 7, we define HMOD among patients with chronically elevated BP or hypertension as the presence of specific cardiac, vascular, and renal alterations.31,159 However, in the setting of hypertensive emergency, more acute manifestations of organ damage are relevant for management.
Acute manifestations of organ damage include: • Patients with severe acute hypertension associated with other clinical conditions likely to require urgent reduction in BP, e.g. acute onset of aortic dissection, myocardial ischaemia, eclampsia, or heart failure.
In patients with an indication to renal artery revascularization and technically unfeasible, or failed, renal artery angioplasty and stenting, open surgical revascularization may be considered. IIb C Renal artery angioplasty is not recommended in patients without confirmed haemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis.c 938,939 III A © ESC 2024
CKD, chronic kidney disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cA haemodynamically relevant stenosis is usually defined by a luminal narrowing of >70% or 50%–70% with post-stenotic dilatation.
ESC Guidelines 3983
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.73
• Malignant hypertension, defined as extreme BP elevations and acute microvascular damage (microangiopathy) affecting various organs.947 The hallmark of this condition is small-artery fibrinoid necrosis in the kidneys, retina, and brain. The acute microangiopathy is typically characterized clinically by retinopathy (flame haemorrhages, cotton wool spots, and/or papilloedema). Other manifestations of microangiopathy include disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalopathy (in about 15% of cases), acute heart failure, and acute deterioration in renal function. • Patients with sudden severe hypertension due to phaeochromocytoma, which can result in severe acute organ damage. The term ‘hypertension urgency’ describes severe hypertension in patients without clinical evidence of acute organ damage. While these patients require BP reduction, they do not usually require admission to hospital, and BP reduction is best achieved with oral medication according to the drug treatment algorithm presented in Section 8. However, these patients may require more urgent outpatient review to ensure that their BP is controlled. Acute and severe increases in BP can sometimes be precipitated by sympathomimetics such as methamphetamine or cocaine, when caution around beta-blocker use is also needed. Many patients in an emergency department with acute pain or distress may have acutely elevated BP that will normalize when the pain and distress are relieved, rather than requiring any specific intervention to lower BP. A diagnostic work-up is necessary for patients with a suspected hypertensive emergency (see Supplementary data online, Table S12).
10.1.2 Acute management of hypertensive
emergencies Key considerations in defining treatment are: (1) Establishing the affected target organ(s) and whether they require any specific interventions other than BP lowering. (2) Determining whether there is a precipitating cause for the acute rise in BP and/or another concomitant health condition present that might affect the treatment plan (e.g. pregnancy). (3) The recommended timing and magnitude of BP lowering required
for safe BP reduction. These considerations will inform the type of BP-lowering treatment required. Regarding BP-lowering drugs, i.v. treatment using a short halflife drug is typically ideal to allow careful titration of the BP response to treatment. This requires a higher dependency clinical area with facilities for continuous or near-continuous haemodynamic monitoring. Recommended drug treatments for specific hypertensive emergencies are provided in the Supplementary data online, Table S13. Rapid and uncontrolled or excessive BP lowering is not recommended in hypertensive emergency as this can lead to further complications. Although i.v. drug administration is recommended for most hypertensive emergencies, oral therapy with ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or beta-blockers (shorter-acting formulations like captopril or metoprolol) can also be effective. However, low initial doses should be used because these patients can be very sensitive to these agents, and treatment should take place in hospital. Further comprehensive details on the clinical management of hypertensive emergencies are available elsewhere.242
10.1.3 Prognosis and follow-up
The survival of patients with hypertensive emergencies has improved over the past few decades, but these patients remain at high risk and should be screened for secondary hypertension. 10.2 Acute blood pressure management in
acute intracerebral haemorrhage In acute intracerebral haemorrhage, an increased BP is common and is associated with a greater risk of haematoma expansion and death, and a worse prognosis for neurological recovery. In trials testing immediate BP lowering (within <6 h) to a systolic target of <140 mmHg, the achieved systolic BP in the intervention group was typically 140–160 mmHg and was reported to reduce the risk of haematoma expansion.948,949 Excessive acute drops in systolic BP (>70 mmHg) may be associated with acute renal injury and early neurological deterioration and should be avoided.950,951
10.3 Acute blood pressure management in
acute ischaemic stroke The beneficial effects of BP reduction in acute ischaemic stroke remain unclear. In patients not receiving i.v. thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy, there is no evidence for actively lowering BP unless it is extremely high (e.g. >220/120 mmHg). If BP is extremely high, an initial moderate relative reduction of 10%–15% over a period of hours may be considered.952 The reason for a more conservative approach to acute BP management is that cerebral autoregulation may be impaired in acute stroke, and maintaining cerebral perfusion relies on systemic BP. In contrast, patients who are treated with i.v. thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy (or both) should have more proactive management of severe hypertension, because they have an increased risk of reperfusion injury and intracranial haemorrhage. In patients undergoing treatment with i.v. thrombolysis, BP should be lowered to <185/110 mmHg prior to thrombolysis and then maintained at <180/105 mmHg over the following 24 h.953 In patients undergoing treatment with mechanical thrombectomy (with or without i.v. thrombolysis) there is limited evidence from clinical trials, but BP should also be lowered to <180/105 mmHg prior to thrombectomy and maintained over the next 24 h.953,954 Therefore, patients with acute ischaemic stroke and a BP of <180/105 mmHg in the first 72 h after stroke do not seem to benefit from the introduction or reintroduction of BP-lowering medication.955 For stable patients who remain hypertensive (≥140/90 mmHg) ≥3 days after an acute ischaemic stroke, initiation or reintroduction of BP-lowering medication is recommended.
Recommendation Table 32 — Recommendations for acutely managing blood pressure in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage or acute ischaemic stroke
Recommendations Classa Levelb
For patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA and an indication for BP lowering, it is recommended that BP-lowering therapy be commenced before hospital discharge.819,820,823 I B In patients with acute ischaemic stroke, early BP lowering with BP-lowering therapy should be considered in the first 24 h in the following settings: • In patients who are eligible for re-perfusion
therapy with intravenous thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy, BP should be carefully lowered and maintained at <180/105 mmHg for at least the first 24 h after treatment.956–960 IIa B
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.74
10.4 Acute blood pressure management in
pre-eclampsia and severe hypertension in pregnancy 10.4.1. Pre-eclampsia Pre-eclampsia is discussed in Section 9. Here we focus on its management in the acute setting. Pre-eclampsia is cured by delivery. Most international societies, including the ESC, recommend an intensive approach to BP lowering in pre-eclampsia.89,964,965 In women with pre-eclampsia and severe hypertension, immediately reducing systolic BP to <160 mmHg and diastolic BP to <105 mmHg using i.v. labetalol or nicardipine (with administration of magnesium sulfate if appropriate and consideration of delivery if appropriate) was recommended in the 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines on the management of arterial hypertension and the 2022 ESC Guidelines for management of cardiovascular disease in pregnancy.1,89 The objective of treatment is to lower BP within 150–180 min. Magnesium sulfate [4 g i.v. over 5 min, then 1 g/h i.v.; or 5 g intramuscularly (i.m.) into each buttock, then 5 g i.m. every 4 h] is recommended for eclampsia treatment but also for women with pre-eclampsia who have severe hypertension and proteinuria or hypertension and neurological symptoms or signs.966 There is a risk of hypotension when magnesium is given concomitantly with nifedipine.967 If BP control is not achieved by 360 min despite two medications, consulting critical care is recommended for intensive care unit admission, stabilization, and delivery (if appropriate).966 Since plasma volume is reduced in preeclampsia, diuretic therapy should be avoided.
10.4.2 Severe acute hypertension in pregnancy
Severe hypertension in pregnancy (without pre-eclampsia) may necessitate acute BP-lowering therapies. Severe hypertension in pregnancy is defined in general as systolic BP of >160 mmHg and diastolic BP of >110 mmHg and is associated with adverse maternal and peri-natal outcomes independent of pre-eclampsia and potentially of the same magnitude as eclampsia itself.89,968 There are differences in rate of BP control between i.v. labetalol and i.v. hydralazine in severe hypertension in pregnancy.969 While evidence is conflicting,667,668 hydralazine may be associated with more peri-natal adverse events than other drugs.970 Nifedipine seems to provide lower BP with lower rates of neonatal complications than labetalol.971 10.5 Peri-operative acute management of
elevated blood pressure Details are provided in the ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.972 Peri-operative hypertension, hypotension, and BP variability are associated with haemodynamic instability and poor clinical outcomes for patients undergoing surgery.973 Pre-operative risk assessment for BP management, therefore, should involve assessing for underlying end-organ damage and comorbidities.974 Postponing necessary non-cardiac surgery is not usually warranted for patients with minor or moderate elevations in BP, as they are not at higher CVD risk.130,975 Avoiding large fluctuations in BP in the peri-operative course is important, and planning a strategy for a patient should account for the baseline office BP.974–977 There is insufficient evidence for reduced or increased perioperative BP targets compared to usual care BP targets to lower peri-operative events.978 No specific measure of BP appears better than any other for predicting risk of peri-operative events.975
10.5.1 Blood pressure-lowering drugs in the
peri-operative phase Routine initiation of a beta-blocker peri-operatively is not necessary.979 Pre-operative initiation of beta-blockers in advance of high-risk, non-cardiac surgery may be considered in patients who have known coronary artery disease or myocardial ischaemia980 or two or more significantly elevated clinical risk factors in order to reduce the incidence of peri-operative myocardial infarction.979 Peri-operative continuation of beta-blockers is recommended for patients currently taking beta-blockers.981 Some studies suggest that continued use of ACE inhibitors is associated with a higher risk of peri-operative hypotension and subsequent end-organ damage including kidney injury, myocardial infarction, and stroke.982 In the Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Preoperative Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition (PREOP-ACEI) trial, transient pre-operative interruption of ACE inhibitor therapy was associated with a decreased risk of intra-operative hypotension.983 A subsequent systematic review also showed a decreased risk of intra-operative hypotension with withholding ACE inhibitors/ARBs before surgery, but no association
• In patients with ischaemic stroke not receiving
re-perfusion treatment and BP of ≥220/110 mmHg, BP should be carefully lowered by approximately 15% during the first 24 h after stroke onset.956–960 IIa C In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage, immediate BP lowering (within 6 h of symptom onset) should be considered to a systolic target 140– 160 mmHg to prevent haematoma expansion and improve functional outcome.948,949 IIa A In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage presenting with systolic BP ≥220 mmHg, acute reduction in systolic BP >70 mmHg from initial levels within 1 h of commencing treatment is not recommended.950,951,960–963 III B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; TIA, transient ischaemic attack. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Recommendation Table 33 — Recommendations for acutely managing blood pressure in patients with severe hypertension in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia (see Evidence Table 46)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
In pre-eclampsia or eclampsia with hypertensive crisis, drug treatment with i.v. labetalol or nicardipine and magnesium is recommended.971 I C In pre-eclampsia or eclampsia associated with pulmonary oedema, nitroglycerin given as an i.v. infusion is recommended.242 I C In severe hypertension in pregnancy: • drug treatment with i.v. labetalol, oral methyldopa, or oral nifedipine is recommended. Intravenous
hydralazine is a second-line option.666–668,969,971 I C © ESC 2024
i.v., intravenous. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3985
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.75
with decreased mortality or CVD outcomes.984 On the other hand, vigilance is needed because withholding ACE inhibitors has also been shown to increase post-operative hypertension.985 In patients with heart failure, loop diuretics can be continued in patients prone to volume overload.986 CCBs are generally considered safe pre-operatively.
11 Patient-centred care
in hypertension
11.1 Definition
Patient-centred care is defined as an attitude of the healthcare professional that closely aligns with the patient’s preferences and needs.987 In the patient-centred approach (Figure 23), patients are viewed as active participants in health services, who work as partners alongside healthcare professionals. A patient-centred approach is associated with higher satisfaction rates, better adherence to recommendations and prescriptions, and better treatment, particularly in the management of chronic illness, such as hypertension.988 While there is limited evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of specific shared decision- making intervention strategies in hypertension care,989 it is viewed as an ethical imperative in healthcare practice and health policy, and in clinical guidelines.130
11.2 Communicating consequences of
treatment In line with patient-centred care, it is important to assess whether patients understand their hypertension-related risk, the rationale for any hypertension treatment, the benefits and harms of hypertension treatment, and that the treatment plan is also centrally guided by what matters most to the patient. Risk communication is challenging, and providers need to be led by the individual’s preferences when presenting more detailed numeric and visual representations of risk and the likely benefits and harms of hypertension treatment. Socio-demographic differences in healthcare need to be considered in patient–provider communication.990,991 Standard approaches to communicate consequences of treatment can involve 10-year risk of a CVD event with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP. Alternatively, individual risk and risk reduction can be communicated in terms of ‘risk age’ or ‘heart age’ (Section 7.3).
P a t i e n t
Lifestyle (inclusive of health behaviour and social context)
Medications Multidisciplinary medical team
Self-care Family
Figure 23 Patient-centred care. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.76
11.3 Self-measuring and monitoring
Self-care refers to individual responsibility for healthy lifestyle behaviours, as well as the actions required to cope with health conditions.996,997 In the context of hypertension, it also includes self-management and self-measurement of BP. Self-management includes lifestyle behaviour (diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol), co-management of medical treatments, and support for adhering to prescribed medication.998 Self-monitoring allows high BP to be detected early,999 and enables patients to co-manage medications with their healthcare provider.1000,1001 Suitably validated and correctly used digital devices have the potential to support co-management,1002,1003 and facilitate remote monitoring of BP.76,81,1004 11.4 Facilitating medication adherence
and persistence Adherence (Figure 24) to BP-lowering drug regimens in clinical practice is almost always lower than seen in clinical trials.1007 Most apparent treatment-resistant hypertension is accounted for by nonadherence.1008 Adherence should always be assessed with a no-blame approach. Various methods are available to assess adherence and, along with details on barriers to adherence, are described in the Supplementary data online and Table S14.1009 Adherence may also be facilitated by an optimal therapeutic regimen, which can be achieved by medication reviews carried out at appropriate intervals. Several factors should be considered: (i) identifying drug-related adverse events and appropriate dosing levels, (ii) using long-acting drugs that require once-daily dosing (preferably drugs that are long-acting due to pharmacokinetic properties rather than galenic formulation), (iii) avoiding complex dosing schedules, (iv) using singlepill combinations whenever feasible, (v) taking into account the financial capacity of the patient to pay for a given regimen in the longer term, if relevant, or other pertinent aspects of the local or national healthcare systems, and (vi) enlisting support of a family member or other social support to facilitate medication adherence and persistence (see Supplementary data online, Table S15).1010 While there have been advancements in digital tools to support selfmanagement of chronic illness including hypertension, there is little efficacy evidence evaluating these interventions. Therefore, it is premature to make recommendations about specific digital tools.
11.5 Multidisciplinary management
A collaborative approach to managing hypertension, using team-based care among physicians, nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, and physiotherapists, offers significant benefits over physician-only care. Multidisciplinary care is intended to be collaborative and complementary to regular medical care1011 and is associated with lower systolic and diastolic BP227,229,1012,1013 and improved outcomes.230,1014 Task-shifting away from physicians is necessary to meet the huge need for the management of elevated BP and hypertension in the population.1015 Prescribing remains a physician duty, but prescribing can be conducted under collaborative practice agreements with the multidisciplinary team in many countries. Further details on patient-centred care in hypertension is provided in the Supplementary data online.
Recommendation Table 34 — Recommendations for communicating consequences of treatment (see Evidence Table 47)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
An informed discussion about CVD risk and treatment benefits tailored to the needs of a patient is recommended as part of hypertension management.992 I C Motivational interviewing should be considered for patients with hypertension at hospitals and community health centres to assist patients in controlling their BP and to enhance treatment adherence.993,994 IIa B Physician–patient web communications are an effective tool that should be considered in primary care, including reporting on home BP readings.995 IIa C © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
Recommendation Table 35 — Recommendations for self-measuring and monitoring blood pressure (see Evidence Table 48)
Recommendations Classa Levelb
Home BP measurement for managing hypertension by using self-monitored BP is recommended to achieve better BP control. I B Self-measurement, when properly performed, is recommended due to positive effects on the acceptance of a diagnosis of hypertension, patient empowerment, and adherence to treatment.1001 I C Enhanced self-monitoring of BP using a device paired with a connected smartphone application may be considered, though evidence to date suggests that this may be no more effective than standard self-monitoring.1005,1006 IIb B © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Recommendation Table 36 — Recommendations for multi/interdisciplinary blood pressure management (see Evidence Table 49)
Recommendation Classa Levelb
Multidisciplinary approaches in the management of patients with elevated BP and hypertension, including appropriate and safe task-shifting away from physicians, are recommended to improve BP control.227,229,230,1012–1014,1016 I A © ESC 2024
BP, blood pressure. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.
ESC Guidelines 3987
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.77
12 Key messages
(1) Given the demographic transition and the worldwide ageing of populations, the number of individuals with elevated BP or hypertension is increasing worldwide. (2) The trajectory of BP control appears to be worsening in North America, in some (but not all) European countries, and elsewhere around the world. (3) The risk for CVD attributable to BP is on a continuous log-linear exposure variable scale, not a binary scale of normotension vs. hypertension. (4) BP-lowering drugs can reduce CVD risk even among individuals
not traditionally classified as hypertensive. Accordingly, a new BP category called ‘elevated BP’ is introduced. Elevated BP is defined as an office systolic BP of 120–139 mmHg or diastolic BP of 70–89 mmHg. Hypertension remains defined as office BP of ≥140/90 mmHg. (5) Hypertension in women is under-studied in basic, clinical, and popu-
lation research. (6) HMOD suggests long-standing or severe hypertension and is associated with increased CVD risk. (7) Absolute CVD risk must be considered when assessing and managing elevated BP. (8) Despite the growing number of hypertension guidelines, the rates
of diagnosis, treatment, and control of hypertension (and elevated BP) remain suboptimal. A major factor underlying this is poor
e.g. affordability of medications
and lack of social support to manage medications
Socio-economic factors
e.g. experience of side-effects and challenges of polypharmacy
(treatment burden)
Therapy-related factors
e.g. beliefs about hypertension and related medications, persistence
of medication taking habits and
emotional distress
Patient-related factors
e.g. hypertension is a disease without an illness (asymptomatic)
and often one among many
morbidities
Condition-related factors
e.g. clarity and consistency of communication with patient, quality of ongoing relationship
with healthcare providers
Health system/healthcare
team factors
Figure 24 The five dimensions of adherence (WHO, 2003) applied to hypertension. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.78
implementation of evidence-based guidelines in real-world clinical practice. (9) One of the most important changes in the 2024 Guidelines is the focus on evidence related to CVD outcomes of BP-lowering interventions rather than BP lowering alone. (10) Irrespective of the threshold BP above which BP-lowering treat-
ment (lifestyle or pharmacological or other treatment) is recommended, the on-treatment BP target is 120–129/70–79 mmHg for all adults, provided this treatment is well tolerated. There are several important exceptions to these targets and individualized decision-making is always the most important priority.
13 Gaps in the evidence
(1) Drivers of worsening trajectories of BP control in women and men. (2) Need for sex-specific data on epidemiology, risk factors, and pathophysiology of hypertension. Need for more prospective studies to assess women’s and men’s specific CVD risk factors pertinent to adults with elevated BP and hypertension, due to biological and socio-cultural conditions. This includes sex-specific weighting of traditional risk factors, as well as inclusion of sexdependent, non-traditional, vascular risk factors such as stress, socio-economic conditions, and others.1017,1018 We are also lacking data on sex-specific hormonal and genetic mechanisms and pathophysiology in the human.1019 Another important area in need of investigation is a better understanding of the role of gender in the management of elevated BP and hypertension (including gender-driven barriers in accessing medical care and adherence). (3) More widespread validation of home BP measuring devices. Validation protocols for cuffless BP measurement devices have just recently been proposed and need to be tested. (4) Clinical effectiveness of HMOD in directing intensity of care and personalized approaches in managing elevated BP and hypertension. (5) Best practice to screen and manage primary aldosteronism. (6) Clinical benefits of treating low CVD-risk individuals with elevated BP and further data strengthening the use of BP-lowering medication among high-risk persons with baseline systolic BP of 120–129 mmHg. (7) Need for more data on the sex-specific optimal dosing, effects, and adverse effects of BP-lowering drugs,1020 in particular from specifically planned prospective randomized trials. (8) More consideration for overall CVD outcomes of BP-lowering
interventions. (9) More European data (RCTs, real life) about the beneficial effect of
treating patients with elevated BP and hypertension with polypills (inclusive of non-BP lowering medications). (10) CVD outcomes-based data on MRAs as add-on therapy solely for resistant hypertension. (11) Trials on the BP-lowering effects of newer antidiabetic drugs (such as SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists) or drugs that now have indications for other conditions, such as finerenone or sacubitril-valsartan. (12) Beneficial BP and CVD effects of increasing dietary potassium intake and other lifestyle interventions. Studies to disentangle the effect of sodium reduction vs. the effect of potassium supplementation on BP control and CVD outcomes. (13) RCTs comparing single-pill combination therapy with fixed doses vs. multiple monotherapies and their effects on CVD outcomes. (14) Cardiovascular outcomes trials of renal denervation. (15) BP-lowering treatment RCTs on different ethnic and migrant groups established in Europe. (16) Pharmacological BP management in young adults (aged <40 years)
and better data on the efficacy of a life-course approach for the drug management of BP.1021 (17) CVD outcomes in moderately to severely frail and/or very elderly persons where BP medications have been deprescribed, and the impact of competing risks. (18) Management of renal artery disease with haemodynamically stable but severe stenosis (i.e. without high-risk features). (19) Need for clinical trials on managing hypertension in patients treated with anticancer drugs or anti-rejection drugs in recipients of an allograft transplant. (20) Hypertension management in the setting of climate changes, global warming, air and other forms of pollution, pandemics, war zones, and in the context of drug restrictions experienced in some low-to-middle-income countries. (21) Need to improve implementation of guidelines by healthcare providers. (22) How to develop sustainable hypertension care at the intersection of growing numbers of patients and limited resources. (23) Treat-to-target trials specifically testing BP-lowering drugs among
drug-naïve persons with baseline BP of 120–129 mmHg and increased CVD risk.
14 ‘What to do’ and ‘what not to do’ messages from the guidelines
A selected sample of the main messages from these guidelines are provided in Table 15.
Table 15 What to do and what not to do
Recommendations Class Level
5 Measuring blood pressure
It is recommended to measure BP using a validated and calibrated device, to enforce the correct measurement technique, and to apply a consistent approach to BP measurement for each patient. I B All adult patients (≥18 years or older) are recommended to have their office and/or out-of-office BP measured on an opportunistic basis and recorded in their medical file, and be told what their current BP is. I C
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3989
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.79
Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended for diagnostic purposes, particularly because it can detect both white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. Where out-of-office measurements are not logistically and/or economically feasible, then it is recommended that the diagnosis be confirmed with a repeat office BP measurement using the correct standardized measurement technique. I B It is recommended that office BP should be measured in both arms at least at the first visit, because a between-arm systolic BP difference of >10 mmHg is associated with an increased CVD risk and may indicate arterial stenosis. I B If a between-arm difference of >10 mmHg in systolic BP is recorded, then it is recommended that all subsequent BP readings use the arm with the higher BP reading. I B Out-of-office BP measurement is recommended for ongoing management to quantify the effects of treatment and guide BP-lowering medication titration, and/or identify possible causes of side effects (e.g. symptomatic hypotension). Where out-of-office measurements are not logistically and/or economically feasible then ongoing management is recommended to be based on repeated office BP measurements using the correct standardized measurement technique. I B It is recommended that all patients undergoing BP measurement also undergo pulse palpation at rest to determine heart rate and arrhythmias such as AF. I C
6 Definition and classification of elevated blood pressure and hypertension
It is recommended that BP be categorized as non-elevated BP, elevated BP, and hypertension to aid treatment decisions. I B It is recommended to use a risk-based approach in the treatment of elevated BP, and individuals with moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia are considered at increased risk for CVD events. I B SCORE2 is recommended for assessing 10-year risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged 40–69 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia. I B SCORE2-OP is recommended for assessing the 10-year risk of fatal and non-fatal CVD among individuals aged ≥70 years with elevated BP who are not already considered at increased risk due to moderate or severe CKD, established CVD, HMOD, diabetes mellitus, or familial hypercholesterolaemia. I B It is recommended that, irrespective of age, individuals with elevated BP and a SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP CVD risk of ≥10% be considered at increased risk for CVD for the purposes of risk-based management of their elevated BP. I B
7 Diagnosing hypertension and investigating underlying causes
In individuals with increased CVD risk where their screening office BP is 120–139/70–89 mmHg, it is recommended to measure BP out-of-office, using ABPM and/or HBPM or, if not logistically feasible, make repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit. I B Where screening office BP is 140–159/90–99 mmHg, it is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be based on out-of-office BP measurement with ABPM and/or HBPM. If these measurements are not logistically or economically feasible, then diagnosis can be made on repeated office BP measurements on more than one visit. I B Where screening BP is ≥160/100 mmHg: • It is recommended that BP 160–179/100–109 mmHg is confirmed as soon as possible (e.g. within 1 month) preferably by either home or ambulatory BP measurements. • It is recommended when BP is ≥180/110 mmHg that hypertensive emergency be excluded. I C It is recommended to measure serum creatinine, eGFR, and urine ACR in all patients with hypertension. I A If moderate-to-severe CKD is diagnosed, it is recommended to repeat measurements of serum creatinine, eGFR, and urine ACR at least annually. I C A 12-lead ECG is recommended for all patients with hypertension. I B Echocardiography is recommended in patients with hypertension and ECG abnormalities, or signs or symptoms of cardiac disease. I B Fundoscopy is recommended if BP >180/110 mmHg in the work-up of hypertensive emergency and malignant hypertension, as well as in hypertensive patients with diabetes. I C Routine genetic testing for patients with hypertension is not recommended. III C It is recommended that patients with hypertension presenting with suggestive signs, symptoms, or medical history of secondary hypertension are appropriately screened for secondary hypertension. I B
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure
Restriction of sodium to approximately 2 g per day is recommended where possible in all adults with elevated BP and hypertension [this is equivalent to about 5 g of salt (sodium chloride) per day or about a teaspoon or less]. I A Moderate-intensity aerobic exercise of ≥150 min/week [moderate aerobic exercise (≥30 min, 5–7 days/week) or alternatively 75 min of vigorous exercise per week over 3 days] is recommended and should be complemented with low- or moderate-intensity dynamic or isometric resistance training (2–3 times/week) to reduce BP and CVD risk. I A It is recommended to aim for a stable and healthy BMI (20–25 kg/m2) and waist circumference values (<94 cm in men and <80 cm in women) to reduce BP and CVD risk. I A
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.80
Adopting a healthy and balanced diet such as the Mediterranean or DASH diets is recommended to help reduce BP and CVD risk. I A Men and women are recommended to drink less alcohol than the upper limit, which is about 100 g/week of pure alcohol. How this translates into number of drinks depends on portion size (the standards of which differ per country), but most drinks contain 8–14 g of alcohol per drink. Preferably, it is recommended to avoid alcohol consumption to achieve best health outcomes. I B It is recommended to restrict free sugar consumption, in particular sugar-sweetened beverages, to a maximum of 10% of energy intake. It is also recommended to discourage consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, such as soft drinks and fruit juices, starting at young age. I B It is recommended to stop tobacco smoking, initiate supportive care, and refer to smoking cessation programmes, as tobacco use strongly and independently causes CVD, CVD events, and all-cause mortality. I A Among all BP-lowering drugs, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, dihydropyridine CCBs, and diuretics (thiazides and thiazide-like drugs such as chlorthalidone and indapamide) have demonstrated the most effective reduction of BP and CVD events, and are therefore recommended as first-line treatments to lower BP. I A It is recommended that beta-blockers are combined with any of the other major BP-lowering drug classes when there are other compelling indications for their use, e.g. angina, post-myocardial infarction, HFrEF, or for heart rate control. I A It is recommended to take medications at the most convenient time of day for the patient to establish a habitual pattern of medication taking to improve adherence. I B Given trial evidence for more effective BP control vs. monotherapy, combination BP-lowering treatment is recommended for most patients with confirmed hypertension (BP ≥140/90 mmHg) as initial therapy. Preferred combinations are a RAS blocker (either an ACE inhibitor or an ARB) with a dihydropyridine CCB or diuretic. Exceptions to consider include patients aged ≥85 years, symptomatic orthostatic hypotension, moderate-to-severe frailty, and those with elevated BP (systolic BP 120–139 mmHg or diastolic BP 70–89 mmHg) with a concomitant indication for treatment. I B In patients receiving combination BP-lowering treatment, fixed-dose single-pill combination treatment is recommended. I B If BP is not controlled with a two-drug combination, increasing to a three-drug combination is recommended, usually a RAS blocker with a dihydropyridine CCB and a thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, and preferably in a single-pill combination. I B Combining two RAS blockers (ACE inhibitor and an ARB) is not recommended. III A In adults with elevated BP and low/medium CVD risk (<10% over 10 years), BP lowering with lifestyle measures is recommended and can reduce the risk of CVD. I B In adults with elevated BP and sufficiently high CVD risk, after 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk. I A It is recommended that in hypertensive patients with confirmed BP ≥140/90 mmHg, irrespective of CVD risk, lifestyle measures and pharmacological BP-lowering treatment is initiated promptly to reduce CVD risk. I A It is recommended to maintain BP-lowering drug treatment lifelong, even beyond the age of 85 years, if well tolerated. I A
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure (blood pressure targets)
To reduce CVD risk, it is recommended that treated systolic BP values in most adults be targeted to 120–129 mmHg, provided the treatment is well tolerated. I A In cases where BP-lowering treatment is poorly tolerated and achieving a target systolic of 120–129 mmHg is not possible, it is recommended to target a systolic BP level that is ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA principle). I A
8 Preventing and treating elevated blood pressure (renal denervation)
Due to a lack of adequately powered outcomes trials demonstrating its safety and CVD benefits, renal denervation is not recommended as a first-line BP-lowering intervention for hypertension. III C Renal denervation is not recommended for treating hypertension in patients with moderate-to-severely impaired renal function (eGFR <40 mL/min/1.73 m2) or secondary causes of hypertension, until further evidence becomes available. III C
9 Managing specific patient groups or circumstances
Young adults Comprehensive screening for the main causes of secondary hypertension is recommended in adults diagnosed with hypertension before the age of 40 years, except for obese young adults where it is recommended to start with an obstructive sleep apnoea evaluation. I B Hypertension in pregnancy In women with gestational hypertension, starting drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg. I B In pregnant women with chronic hypertension, starting drug treatment is recommended for those with confirmed office systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg. I B In women with chronic and gestational hypertension, it is recommended to lower BP below 140/90 mmHg but not below 80 mmHg for diastolic BP. I C
Continued
ESC Guidelines 3991
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.81
Dihydropyridine CCBs (preferably extended-release nifedipine), labetalol, and methyldopa are recommended first-line BP-lowering medications for treating hypertension in pregnancy. I C In consultation with an obstetrician, low- to moderate-intensity exercise is recommended in all pregnant women without contraindications to reduce the risk of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia. I B RAS blockers are not recommended during pregnancy. III B Very old and frail patients; orthostatic hypotension It is recommended that treatment of elevated BP and hypertension among older patients aged <85 years who are not moderately to severely frail follows the same guidelines as for younger people, provided BP-lowering treatment is well tolerated. I A It is recommended to maintain BP-lowering drug treatment lifelong, even beyond the age of 85 years, if well tolerated. I A Before starting or intensifying BP-lowering medication, it is recommended to test for orthostatic hypotension, by first having the patient sit or lie for 5 min and then measuring BP 1 and/or 3 min after standing. I B It is recommended to pursue non-pharmacological approaches as the first-line treatment of orthostatic hypotension among persons with supine hypertension. For such patients, it is also recommended to switch BP-lowering medications that worsen orthostatic hypotension to an alternative BP-lowering therapy and not to simply de-intensify therapy. I A Diabetes In most adults with elevated BP and diabetes, after a maximum of 3 months of lifestyle intervention, BP lowering with pharmacological treatment is recommended for those with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg to reduce CVD risk. I A BP-lowering drug treatment is recommended for people with pre-diabetes or obesity when confirmed office BP is ≥140/90 mmHg or when office BP is 130–139/80–89 mmHg and the patient is at predicted 10-year risk of CVD ≥10% or with high-risk conditions, despite a maximum of 3 months of lifestyle therapy. I A In persons with diabetes who are receiving BP-lowering drugs, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120–129 mmHg, if tolerated. I A Chronic kidney disease In patients with diabetic or non-diabetic moderate-to-severe CKD and confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg, lifestyle optimization and BP-lowering medication are recommended to reduce CVD risk, provided such treatment is well tolerated. I A In adults with moderate-to-severe CKD who are receiving BP-lowering drugs and who have eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m2, it is recommended to target systolic BP to 120–129 mmHg, if tolerated. Individualized BP targets are recommended for those with lower eGFR or renal transplantation. I A In hypertensive patients with CKD and eGFR >20 mL/min/1.73 m2, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve outcomes in the context of their modest BP-lowering properties. I A Cardiac disease In patients with a history of myocardial infarction who require BP-lowering treatment, beta-blockers and RAS blockers are recommended as part of that treatment. I A In patients with symptomatic angina who require BP-lowering treatment, beta-blockers and/or CCBs are recommended as part of that treatment. I A In patients with symptomatic HFrEF/HFmrEF, the following treatments with BP-lowering effects are recommended to improve outcomes: ACE inhibitors (or ARBs if ACE inhibitors are not tolerated) or ARNi, beta-blockers, MRAs, and SGLT2 inhibitors. I A In hypertensive patients with symptomatic HFpEF, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to improve outcomes in the context of their modest BP-lowering properties. I A Other conditions It is recommended that the BP-lowering drug treatment strategy for preventing stroke should comprise a RAS blocker plus a CCB or a thiazide-like diuretic. I A In patients with confirmed BP ≥130/80 mmHg with a history of TIA or stroke a systolic BP target 120–129 mmHg is recommended to reduce CVD outcomes, provided treatment is tolerated. I A Renal artery angioplasty is not recommended in patients without confirmed haemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis. III A
10 Acute and short-term lowering of blood pressure
Intracerebral haemorrhage or acute ischaemic stroke For patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA and an indication for BP lowering, it is recommended that BP lowering therapy should be commenced before hospital discharge. I B In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage presenting with systolic BP ≥220 mmHg, acute reduction in systolic BP >70 mmHg from initial levels within 1 h of commencing treatment is not recommended. III B
Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.82
15 Evidence tables
Evidence tables are available at European Heart Journal online.
16 Data availability statement
No new data were generated or analysed in support of this research.
17 Author information
Author/task force Member Affiliations: Cian P. McCarthy, Cardiovascular Division Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School Boston, MA, United States of America; Rosa Maria Bruno, PARCC, Université Paris Cité, Inserm, Paris, France, and Pharmacology & Hypertension, AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France; Sofie Brouwers, Cardiovascular Center Aalst, Department of Cardiology, OLV Clinic Aalst, Aalst, Belgium, and Department of Experimental Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Michelle D. Canavan, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland, and Department of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital Galway, Saolta Hospitals Group, Galway, Ireland; Claudio Ceconi, Motusmed Clinic, Brescia, Italy; Ruxandra Maria Christodorescu, Department V Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy V Babes, Timisoara, Romania, and Research Center, Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Timisoara, Romania; Stella S. Daskalopoulou, Medicine Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada; Charles J. Ferro, Department of Renal Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom, and Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Eva Gerdts, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway, and Department of Heart Disease, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Henner Hanssen, Department Sport, Exercise and Health, Medical Faculty, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; Julie Harris (United Kingdom), ESC Patient Forum, Sophia Antipolis, France; Lucas Lauder, Department of cardiology, University hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland, and Department of internal medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology, and Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland university medical center, Homburg, Germany; Richard J. McManus, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Gerard J. Molloy, School of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland; Kazem Rahimi, Deep Medicine, Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Vera Regitz-Zagrosek, Charite, University Medicine Berlin, Gender in Medicine, Berlin, Germany; Gian Paolo Rossi, Department of Medicine, DIMED, University of Padua, Padua, Italy; Else Charlotte Sandset, Department of Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway, The Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, Oslo, Norway, and Institute of Clinical Medicine University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Bart Scheenaerts (Belgium), ESC Patient Forum, Sophia Antipolis, France; Jan A. Staessen, Non-Profit Research Association Alliance for the Promotion of Preventive Medicine, Mechelen, Belgium, and Biomedical Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Izabella Uchmanowicz, Department of Nursing and Obstetrics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland; and Maurizio Volterrani, Exercise Science and Medicine San Raffaele Open University, Rome, Italy, and Cardiopulmonary Department, IRCCS San Raffaele, Rome, Italy.
18 Appendix
ESC Scientific Document Group Includes Document Reviewers and ESC National Cardiac Societies. Document Reviewers: Ana Abreu (CPG Review Co-ordinator) (Portugal), Michael Hecht Olsen (CPG Review Co-ordinator) (Denmark), Marco Ambrosetti (Italy), Emmanuel Androulakis (United Kingdom), Lia Evi Bang (Denmark), Jesper Nørgaard Bech (Denmark), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Pierre Boutouyrie (France), Luís Bronze (Portugal), Sergio Buccheri (Sweden), Regina Dalmau (Spain), Maria Carmen De Pablo Zarzosa (Spain), Christian Delles (United
Severe hypertension in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia In pre-eclampsia or eclampsia with hypertensive crisis, drug treatment with i.v. labetalol or nicardipine and magnesium is recommended. I C In pre-eclampsia or eclampsia associated with pulmonary oedema, nitroglycerin given as an i.v. infusion is recommended. I C In severe hypertension in pregnancy: • drug treatment with i.v. labetalol, oral methyldopa, or oral nifedipine is recommended. Intravenous hydralazine is a second-line option. I C
11 Patient-centred care in hypertension
An informed discussion about CVD risk and treatment benefits tailored to the needs of a patient is recommended as part of hypertension management. I C Home BP measurement for managing hypertension by using self-monitored BP is recommended to achieve better BP control. I B Self-measurement, when properly performed, is recommended due to positive effects on the acceptance of a diagnosis of hypertension, patient empowerment, and adherence to treatment. I C Multidisciplinary approaches in the management of patients with elevated BP and hypertension, including appropriate and safe task-shifting away from physicians are recommended to improve BP control. I A © ESC 2024
ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ACR, albumin:creatinine ratio; AF, atrial fibrillation; ALARA, as low as reasonably achievable; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; ARNi, angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blocker; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DASH, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension; ECG, electrocardiogram; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HF(m)rEF, heart failure with (mildly) reduced ejection fraction; HMOD, hypertension-mediated organ damage; i.v., intravenous; MRA, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; SCORE2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2-Older Persons; SGLT2, sodium–glucose co-transporter 2; TIA, transient ischaemic attack.
ESC Guidelines 3993
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.83
Kingdom), Maria Manuela Fiuza (Portugal), Rahima Gabulova (Azerbaijan), Bjørn Olav Haugen (Norway), Christian Heiss (United Kingdom), Borja Ibanez (Spain), Stefan James (Sweden), Vikas Kapil (United Kingdom), Meral Kayikçioglu (Turkey), Lars Køber (Denmark), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), Emanuela Teresa Locati (Italy), Sharon MacDonald (United Kingdom), Anastasia S. Mihailidou (Australia), Borislava Mihaylova (United Kingdom), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom) Martin Bodtker Mortensen (Denmark), Sandor Nardai (Hungary), Lis Neubeck (United Kingdom), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Peter M. Nilsson (Sweden), Agnes A. Pasquet (Belgium), Mónica Mendes Pedro (Portugal), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Ernst Rietzschel (Belgium), Bianca Rocca (Italy), Xavier Rossello (Spain), Jean-Paul Schmid (Switzerland), Eduard Shantsila (United Kingdom), Isabella Sudano (Switzerland), Ana Teresa Timóteo (Portugal), Georgios Tsivgoulis (Greece), Andrea Ungar (Italy), Ilonca Vaartjes (Netherlands), Frank Visseren (Netherlands), Heinz Voeller (Germany), Christiaan Vrints (Belgium), Adam Witkowski (Poland), Maria-Christina Zennaro (France), and Katja Zeppenfeld (Netherlands). ESC National Cardiac Societies actively involved in the review process of the 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension: Albania: Albanian Society of Cardiology, Naltin Shuka; Algeria: Algerian Society of Cardiology, Nadia Laredj; Austria: Austrian Society of Cardiology, Noemi Pavo; Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan Society of Cardiology, Ulvi Mirzoyev; Belgium: Belgian Society of Cardiology, Philippe van de Borne; Bosnia and Herzegovina: Association of Cardiologists of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Šekib Sokolović; Bulgaria: Bulgarian Society of Cardiology, Arman Postadzhiyan; Croatia: Croatian Cardiac Society, Jure Samardzic; Cyprus: Cyprus Society of Cardiology, Petros Agathangelou; Czechia: Czech Society of Cardiology, Jiri Widimsky; Denmark: Danish Society of Cardiology, Michael Hecht Olsen; Egypt: Egyptian Society of Cardiology, Wael M. El-Kilany; Estonia: Estonian Society of Cardiology, Priit Pauklin; Finland: Finnish Cardiac Society, Jari A. Laukkanen; France: French Society of Cardiology, Romain Boulestreau; Georgia: Georgian Society of Cardiology, Bezhan Tsinamdzgvrishvili; Germany: German Cardiac Society, Ulrich Kintscher; Greece: Hellenic Society of Cardiology, Maria Marketou; Hungary: Hungarian Society of Cardiology, Dénes Páll; Iceland: Icelandic Society of Cardiology, Þórdís Jóna Hrafnkelsdóttir; Ireland: Irish Cardiac Society, Eamon Dolan; Israel: Israel Heart Society, Talya Wolak; Italy: Italian Federation of Cardiology, Grzegorz Bilo; Kazakhstan: Association of Cardiologists of Kazakhstan, Meiramgul Kapsimetovna Tundybayeva; Kyrgyzstan: Kyrgyz Society of Cardiology, Erkin Mirrakhimov, Latvia: Latvian Society of Cardiology, Karlis Trusinskis; Lebanon: Lebanese Society of Cardiology, Ghassan Kiwan; Libya: Libyan Cardiac Society, Omar Msalem; Lithuania: Lithuanian Society of Cardiology, Jolita Badarienė; Luxembourg: Luxembourg Society of Cardiology, Cristiana-Astra Banu; Malta: Maltese Cardiac Society, Matthew Mercieca Balbi; Moldova (Republic of): Moldavian Society of Cardiology, Alexandru Caraus; Montenegro: Montenegro Society of Cardiology, Aneta Boskovic; Morocco: Moroccan Society of Cardiology, Najat Mouine; Netherlands: Netherlands Society of Cardiology, Tom Vromen; North Macedonia: National Society of Cardiology of North Macedonia, Marijan Bosevski; Norway: Norwegian Society of Cardiology, Helga B. Midtbø; Poland: Polish Cardiac Society, Adrian Doroszko; Portugal: Portuguese Society of Cardiology, Hélder Dores; Romania: Romanian Society of Cardiology, Elisabeta Badila; San Marino: San Marino Society of Cardiology, Roberto Bini; Serbia: Cardiology Society of Serbia, Dragan Vojislav Simić; Slovenia: Slovenian Society of Cardiology, Zlatko Fras; Spain: Spanish Society of Cardiology, Pilar Mazón; Sweden: Swedish Society of Cardiology, Jonas Spaak; Switzerland: Swiss Society of Cardiology, Thilo Burkard; Syrian Arab Republic: Syrian Cardiovascular Association, Elias Barakat; Tunisia: Tunisian Society of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery, Salem Abdessalem; Türkiye: Turkish Society of Cardiology, Yilmaz Gunes; Ukraine: Ukrainian Association of Cardiology, Yurij M. Sirenko; United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: British Cardiovascular Society, Adrian J. B. Brady; and Uzbekistan: Association of Cardiologists of Uzbekistan, Gulnoz Abdusattarovna Khamidullaeva.
ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee: Eva Prescott (Chairperson) (Denmark), Stefan James (Co-Chairperson) (Sweden), Elena Arbelo (Spain), Colin Baigent (United Kingdom), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Sergio Buccheri (Sweden), Borja Ibanez (Spain), Lars Køber (Denmark), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), John William McEvoy (Ireland), Borislava Mihaylova (United Kingdom), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom), Lis Neubeck (United Kingdom), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Agnes A. Pasquet (Belgium), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Bianca Rocca (Italy), Xavier Rossello (Spain), Ilonca Vaartjes (Netherlands), Christiaan Vrints (Belgium), Adam Witkowski (Poland), and Katja Zeppenfeld (Netherlands).
19 References
1. Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Rosei EA, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J 2018;39: 3021–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy339 2. Murray CJL, Aravkin AY, Zheng P, Abbafati C, Abbas KM, Abbasi-Kangevari M, et al. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020;396:1223–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2 3. Mensah GA, Fuster V, Murray CJL, Roth GA, Mensah GA, Abate YH, et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risks, 1990–2022. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82: 2350–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2023.11.007 4. Johnson JL, Greaves L, Repta R. Better science with sex and gender: facilitating the use of a sex and gender-based analysis in health research. Int J Equity Health 2009;8:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-8-14 5. Mauvais-Jarvis F, Bairey Merz N, Barnes PJ, Brinton RD, Carrero J-J, DeMeo DL, et al. Sex and gender: modifiers of health, disease, and medicine. Lancet 2020;396:565–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31561-0 6. Camm AJ, Lüscher TF, Maurer G, Serruys PW (eds). The ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. Oxford University Press, 2018. 7. Mayfield SK, Foti K, Moran AE, Blakeman DE, Frieden TR. Hypertension call to action: will we respond to the call with action? Am J Hypertens 2022;35:214–6. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/ajh/hpab191 8. Muntner P. The continuing challenge of low rates of blood pressure control among US adults. Am J Hypertens 2022;35:839–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpac075 9. Reuter H, Jordan J. Status of hypertension in Europe. Curr Opin Cardiol 2019;34:342–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/hco.0000000000000642 10. Brown JM, Siddiqui M, Calhoun DA, Carey RM, Hopkins PN, Williams GH, et al. The unrecognized prevalence of primary aldosteronism: a cross-sectional study. Ann Intern Med 2020;173:10–20. https://doi.org/10.7326/m20-0065 11. Oparil S, Acelajado MC, Bakris GL, Berlowitz DR, Cífková R, Dominiczak AF, et al. Hypertension. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018;4:18014. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp. 2018.14 12. Navaneethabalakrishnan S, Smith HL, Arenaz CM, Goodlett BL, McDermott JG, Mitchell BM. Update on immune mechanisms in hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2022; 35:842–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpac077 13. Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham heart study. N Engl J Med 1990;322:1561–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199005313222203 14. Devereux RB, Wachtell K, Gerdts E, Boman K, Nieminen MS, Papademetriou V, et al. Prognostic significance of left ventricular mass change during treatment of hypertension. JAMA 2004;292:2350–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.19.2350 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.84
15. de Simone G, Gottdiener JS, Chinali M, Maurer MS. Left ventricular mass predicts heart failure not related to previous myocardial infarction: the cardiovascular health study. Eur Heart J 2008;29:741–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm605 16. Verdecchia P, Porcellati C, Reboldi G, Gattobigio R, Borgioni C, Pearson TA, et al. Left ventricular hypertrophy as an independent predictor of acute cerebrovascular events in essential hypertension. Circulation 2001;104:2039–44. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hc4201.097944 17. Hijazi Z, Verdecchia P, Oldgren J, Andersson U, Reboldi G, Di Pasquale G, et al. Cardiac biomarkers and left ventricular hypertrophy in relation to outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: experiences from the RE-LY trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2019;8: e010107. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.118.010107 18. Siedlinski M, Carnevale L, Xu X, Carnevale D, Evangelou E, Caulfield MJ, et al. Genetic analyses identify brain structures related to cognitive impairment associated with elevated blood pressure. Eur Heart J 2023;44:2114–25. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad101 19. Cheung AK, Chang TI, Cushman WC, Furth SL, Hou FF, Ix JH, et al. KDIGO 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of blood pressure in chronic kidney disease. Kidney International 2021;99:S1–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2020.11.003 20. Subbiah A, Bhowmik D. KDIGO recommendations on blood pressure management in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int 2022;101:1299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint. 2022.02.036 21. Cheung CY, Biousse V, Keane PA, Schiffrin EL, Wong TY. Hypertensive eye disease. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2022;8:14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-022-00342-0 22. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 2002;360:1903–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0140-6736(02)11911-8 23. O’Rourke MF, Safar ME. Relationship between aortic stiffening and microvascular disease in brain and kidney: cause and logic of therapy. Hypertension 2005;46:200–4. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.Hyp.0000168052.00426.65 24. Gerdts E, Izzo R, Mancusi C, Losi MA, Manzi MV, Canciello G, et al. Left ventricular hypertrophy offsets the sex difference in cardiovascular risk (the Campania Salute Network). Int J Cardiol 2018;258:257–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.12.086 25. Gerdts E, Okin PM, de Simone G, Cramariuc D, Wachtell K, Boman K, et al. Gender differences in left ventricular structure and function during antihypertensive treatment: the Losartan intervention for endpoint reduction in hypertension study. Hypertension 2008;51:1109–14. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.107474 26. Gerdts E, Wachtell K, Omvik P, Otterstad JE, Oikarinen L, Boman K, et al. Left atrial size and risk of major cardiovascular events during antihypertensive treatment: Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension Trial. Hypertension 2007;49:311–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.Hyp.0000254322.96189.85 27. Park JB, Schiffrin EL. Small artery remodeling is the most prevalent (earliest?) form of target organ damage in mild essential hypertension. J Hypertens 2001;19:921–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004872-200105000-00013 28. Vasan RS, Pan S, Xanthakis V, Beiser A, Larson MG, Seshadri S, et al. Arterial stiffness and long-term risk of health outcomes: the Framingham heart study. Hypertension 2022;79:1045–56. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18776 29. Piskorz D. Hypertensive mediated organ damage and hypertension management. How to assess beneficial effects of antihypertensive treatments? High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 2020;27:9–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-020-00361-6 30. Vallelonga F, Cesareo M, Menon L, Airale L, Leone D, Astarita A, et al. Cardiovascular hypertension-mediated organ damage in hypertensive urgencies and hypertensive outpatients. Front Cardiovasc Med 2022;9:889554. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm. 2022.889554 31. Vasan RS, Song RJ, Xanthakis V, Beiser A, DeCarli C, Mitchell GF, et al. Hypertension-mediated organ damage: prevalence, correlates, and prognosis in the community. Hypertension 2022;79:505–15. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 121.18502 32. Rapsomaniki E, Timmis A, George J, Pujades-Rodriguez M, Shah AD, Denaxas S, et al. Blood pressure and incidence of twelve cardiovascular diseases: lifetime risks, healthy life-years lost, and age-specific associations in 1·25 million people. Lancet 2014;383: 1899–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60685-1 33. Malik R, Georgakis MK, Vujkovic M, Damrauer SM, Elliott P, Karhunen V, et al. Relationship between blood pressure and incident cardiovascular disease: linear and nonlinear Mendelian randomization analyses. Hypertension 2021;77:2004–13. https:// doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.16534 34. Ji H, Kim A, Ebinger JE, Niiranen TJ, Claggett BL, Bairey Merz CN, et al. Sex differences in blood pressure trajectories over the life course. JAMA Cardiol 2020;5:19–26. https:// doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2019.5306 35. Salles GF, Reboldi G, Fagard RH, Cardoso CRL, Pierdomenico SD, Verdecchia P, et al. Prognostic effect of the nocturnal blood pressure fall in hypertensive patients: the ambulatory blood pressure collaboration in patients with hypertension (ABC-H) meta-analysis. Hypertension 2016;67:693–700. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.06981 36. Verdecchia P. Prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressure: current evidence and clinical implications. Hypertension 2000;35:844–51. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp. 35.3.844 37. Mauck GW, Smith CR, Geddes LA, Bourland JD. The meaning of the point of maximum oscillations in cuff pressure in the indirect measurement of blood pressure— part ii. J Biomech Eng 1980;102:28–33. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3138195 38. Clark CE, Warren FC, Boddy K, McDonagh STJ, Moore SF, Goddard J, et al. Associations between systolic interarm differences in blood pressure and cardiovascular disease outcomes and mortality: individual participant data meta-analysis, development and validation of a prognostic algorithm: the INTERPRESS-IPD collaboration. Hypertension 2021;77:650–61. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15997 39. Picone DS, Deshpande RA, Schultz MG, Fonseca R, Campbell NRC, Delles C, et al. Nonvalidated home blood pressure devices dominate the online marketplace in Australia: major implications for cardiovascular risk management. Hypertension 2020; 75:1593–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.14719 40. Picone DS, Campbell NRC, Schutte AE, Olsen MH, Ordunez P, Whelton PK, et al. Validation status of blood pressure measuring devices sold globally. JAMA 2022;327: 680–1. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.24464 41. Stergiou GS, O’Brien E, Myers M, Palatini P, Parati G, Kollias A, et al. STRIDE BP international initiative for accurate blood pressure measurement: systematic review of published validation studies of blood pressure measuring devices. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2019;21:1616–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13710 42. Stergiou GS, Alpert B, Mieke S, Asmar R, Atkins N, Eckert S, et al. A universal standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/ International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) collaboration statement. Hypertension 2018;71:368–74. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 117.10237 43. Stergiou GS, Mukkamala R, Avolio A, Kyriakoulis KG, Mieke S, Murray A, et al. Cuffless blood pressure measuring devices: review and statement by the European Society of Hypertension working group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability. J Hypertens 2022;40:1449–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003224 44. Stergiou GS, Avolio AP, Palatini P, Kyriakoulis KG, Schutte AE, Mieke S, et al. European Society of Hypertension recommendations for the validation of cuffless blood pressure measuring devices: European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability. J Hypertens 2023;41: 2074–87. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003483 45. McAlister FA, Straus SE. Evidence based treatment of hypertension. Measurement of blood pressure: an evidence based review. BMJ 2001;322:908–11. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.322.7291.908 46. Fagius J, Karhuvaara S. Sympathetic activity and blood pressure increases with bladder distension in humans. Hypertension 1989;14:511–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/01. hyp.14.5.511 47. Stergiou GS, Kyriakoulis KG, Stambolliu E, Destounis A, Karpettas N, Kalogeropoulos P, et al. Blood pressure measurement in atrial fibrillation: review and meta-analysis of evidence on accuracy and clinical relevance. J Hypertens 2019;37:2430–41. https://doi. org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002201 48. Clark CE, McDonagh STJ, McManus RJ. Accuracy of automated blood pressure measurements in the presence of atrial fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hum Hypertens 2019;33:352–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-018-0153-z 49. Verberk WJ, Omboni S, Kollias A, Stergiou GS. Screening for atrial fibrillation with automated blood pressure measurement: research evidence and practice recommendations. Int J Cardiol 2016;203:465–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2015. 10.182 50. Manning DM, Kuchirka C, Kaminski J. Miscuffing: inappropriate blood pressure cuff application. Circulation 1983;68:763–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.68.4.763 51. Irving G, Holden J, Stevens R, McManus RJ. Which cuff should I use? Indirect blood pressure measurement for the diagnosis of hypertension in patients with obesity: a diagnostic accuracy review. BMJ Open 2016;6:e012429. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmjopen-2016-012429 52. Keeley EC, Villanueva M, Chen YE, Gong Y, Handberg EM, Smith SM, et al. Attended vs unattended systolic blood pressure measurement: a randomized comparison in patients with cardiovascular disease. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2020;22:1987–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.14037 53. Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M, Kiss A, Tobe SW, Grant FC, et al. Conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in primary care patients with systolic hypertension: randomised parallel design controlled trial. BMJ 2011;342:d286. https:// doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d286 54. Clark CE. Inter-arm blood pressure difference, when is it a useful risk marker for cardiovascular events? J Hum Hypertens 2022;36:117–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371- 021-00629-x 55. Clark CE, Steele AM, Taylor RS, Shore AC, Ukoumunne OC, Campbell JL. Interarm blood pressure difference in people with diabetes: measurement and vascular and mortality implications: a cohort study. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1613–20. https://doi. org/10.2337/dc13-1576 56. Juraschek SP, Appel LJ, Mitchell CM, Mukamal KJ, Lipsitz LA, Blackford AL, et al. Comparison of supine and seated orthostatic hypotension assessments and their association with falls and orthostatic symptoms. J Am Geriatr Soc 2022;70:2310–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17804
ESC Guidelines 3995
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.85
57. Stergiou GS, Palatini P, Parati G, O’Brien E, Januszewicz A, Lurbe E, et al. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens 2021;39:1293–302. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh. 0000000000002843 58. Parati G, Stergiou GS, Bilo G, Kollias A, Pengo M, Ochoa J, et al. Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the working group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability of the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens 2021;39:1742–67. https://doi. org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002922 59. Bradley CK, Choi E, Abdalla M, Mizuno H, Lam M, Cepeda M, et al. Use of different blood pressure thresholds to reduce the number of home blood pressure monitoring days needed for detecting hypertension. Hypertension 2023;80:2169–77. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21118 60. Hodgkinson JA, Lee MM, Milner S, Bradburn P, Stevens R, Hobbs FDR, et al. Accuracy of blood-pressure monitors owned by patients with hypertension (ACCU-RATE study): a cross-sectional, observational study in central England. Br J Gen Pract 2020; 70:e548–54. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X710381 61. Niiranen TJ, Asayama K, Thijs L, Johansson JK, Ohkubo T, Kikuya M, et al. Outcome-driven thresholds for home blood pressure measurement: international database of home blood pressure in relation to cardiovascular outcome. Hypertension 2013;61:27–34. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.00100 62. Parati G, Stergiou G, O’Brien E, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens 2014;32:1359–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000221 63. Yang WY, Thijs L, Zhang ZY, Asayama K, Boggia J, Hansen TW, et al. Evidence-based proposal for the number of ambulatory readings required for assessing blood pressure level in research settings: an analysis of the IDACO database. Blood Press 2018;27: 341–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08037051.2018.1476057 64. Asayama K, Stolarz-Skrzypek K, Yang WY, Hansen TW, Brguljan-Hitij J, Odili AN, et al. What did we learn from the international databases on ambulatory and home blood pressure in relation to cardiovascular outcome? Hypertens Res 2023;46:934–49. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-023-01191-4 65. Drawz PE, Agarwal A, Dwyer JP, Horwitz E, Lash J, Lenoir K, et al. Concordance between blood pressure in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial and in routine clinical practice. JAMA Intern Med 2020;180:1655–63. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamainternmed.2020.5028 66. Jaeger BC, Bress AP, Bundy JD, Cheung AK, Cushman WC, Drawz PE, et al. Longer-term all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with intensive blood pressure control: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol 2022;7:1138–46. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2022.3345 67. Ntineri A, Niiranen TJ, McManus RJ, Lindroos A, Jula A, Schwartz C, et al. Ambulatory versus home blood pressure monitoring: frequency and determinants of blood pressure difference and diagnostic disagreement. J Hypertens 2019;37:1974–81. https://doi. org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002148 68. Sheppard JP, Fletcher B, Gill P, Martin U, Roberts N, McManus RJ. Predictors of the home-clinic blood pressure difference: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Hypertens 2016;29:614–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpv157 69. Franklin SS, Thijs L, Li Y, Hansen TW, Boggia J, Liu Y, et al. Masked hypertension in diabetes mellitus: treatment implications for clinical practice. Hypertension 2013;61: 964–71. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.00289 70. Guirguis-Blake JM, Evans CV, Webber EM, Coppola EL, Perdue LA, Weyrich MS. Screening for hypertension in adults: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US preventive services task force. JAMA 2021;325:1657–69. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jama.2020.21669 71. Xu W, Goldberg SI, Shubina M, Turchin A. Optimal systolic blood pressure target, time to intensification, and time to follow-up in treatment of hypertension: population based retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2015;350:h158. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h158 72. Antza C, Farmakis I, Doundoulakis I, Akrivos E, Stalikas N, Zafeiropoulos S, et al. Reproducibility of masked hypertension and office-based hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 2022;40:1053–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh. 0000000000003111 73. Uhlig K, Patel K, Ip S, Kitsios GD, Balk EM. Self-measured blood pressure monitoring in the management of hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2013;159:185–94. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-159-3-201308060-00008 74. Tucker KL, Sheppard JP, Stevens R, Bosworth HB, Bove A, Bray EP, et al. Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2017;14:e1002389. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pmed.1002389 75. McManus RJ, Mant J, Franssen M, Nickless A, Schwartz C, Hodgkinson J, et al. Efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for titration of antihypertensive medication (TASMINH4): an unmasked randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2018;391:949–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30309-x 76. McManus RJ, Little P, Stuart B, Morton K, Raftery J, Kelly J, et al. Home and Online Management and Evaluation of Blood Pressure (HOME BP) using a digital intervention in poorly controlled hypertension: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2021;372:m4858. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4858 77. Li R, Liang N, Bu F, Hesketh T. The effectiveness of self-management of hypertension in adults using mobile health: systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020;8:e17776. https://doi.org/10.2196/17776 78. Acharya S, Neupane G, Seals A, Madhav KC, Giustini D, Sharma S, et al. Self-measured blood pressure-guided pharmacotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of US-based telemedicine trials. Hypertension 2024;81:648–57. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.123.22109 79. Monahan M, Jowett S, Nickless A, Franssen M, Grant S, Greenfield S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of telemonitoring and self-monitoring of blood pressure for antihypertensive titration in primary care (TASMINH4). Hypertension 2019;73:1231–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.118.12415 80. Wood S, Greenfield SM, Sayeed Haque M, Martin U, Gill PS, Mant J, et al. Influence of ethnicity on acceptability of method of blood pressure monitoring: a cross-sectional study in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2016;66:e577–586. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X685717 81. Stergiou GS, Karpettas N, Destounis A, Tzamouranis D, Nasothimiou E, Kollias A, et al. Home blood pressure monitoring alone vs. combined clinic and ambulatory measurements in following treatment-induced changes in blood pressure and organ damage. Am J Hypertens 2014;27:184–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpt206 82. Staessen JA, Byttebier G, Buntinx F, Celis H, O’Brien ET, Fagard R. Antihypertensive treatment based on conventional or ambulatory blood pressure measurement. A randomized controlled trial. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and treatment of hypertension investigators. JAMA 1997;278:1065–72. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama. 1997.03550130039034 83. McEvoy JW, Leahy N, Parati G. The apples and oranges of blood pressure variability. Hypertension 2023;80:2556–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21927 84. Ishikuro M, Obara T, Metoki H, Ohkubo T, Yamamoto M, Akutsu K, et al. Blood pressure measured in the clinic and at home during pregnancy among nulliparous and multiparous women: the BOSHI study. Am J Hypertens 2013;26:141–8. https://doi.org/10. 1093/ajh/hps002 85. Bello NA, Woolley JJ, Cleary KL, Falzon L, Alpert BS, Oparil S, et al. Accuracy of blood pressure measurement devices in pregnancy: a systematic review of validation studies. Hypertension 2018;71:326–35. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10295 86. Tucker KL, Mort S, Yu LM, Campbell H, Rivero-Arias O, Wilson HM, et al. Effect of self-monitoring of blood pressure on diagnosis of hypertension during higher-risk pregnancy: the BUMP 1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2022;327:1656–65. https:// doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.4712 87. Chappell LC, Tucker KL, Galal U, Yu L-M, Campbell H, Rivero-Arias O, et al. Effect of self-monitoring of blood pressure on blood pressure control in pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension: the BUMP 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2022;327:1666–78. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.4726 88. Tita AT, Szychowski JM, Boggess K, Dugoff L, Sibai B, Lawrence K, et al. Treatment for mild chronic hypertension during pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2022;386:1781–92. https:// doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2201295 89. Regitz-Zagrosek V, Roos-Hesselink JW, Bauersachs J, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Cífková R, De Bonis M, et al. 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. Eur Heart J 2018;39:3165–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy340 90. Tikhonoff V, Kuznetsova T, Thijs L, Cauwenberghs N, Stolarz-Skrzypek K, Seidlerová J, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure and long-term risk for atrial fibrillation. Heart 2018; 104:1263–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312488 91. Lip GYH, Coca A, Kahan T, Boriani G, Manolis AS, Olsen MH, et al. Hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias: a consensus document from the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and ESC Council on Hypertension, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE). Europace 2017;19:891–911. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux091 92. Šelmytė-Besusparė A, Barysienė J, Petrikonytė D, Aidietis A, Marinskis G, Laucevičius A. Auscultatory versus oscillometric blood pressure measurement in patients with atrial fibrillation and arterial hypertension. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2017;17:87. https://doi. org/10.1186/s12872-017-0521-6 93. Omboni S, Ballatore T, Rizzi F, Tomassini F, Campolo L, Panzeri E, et al. 24-Hour ambulatory blood pressure telemonitoring in patients at risk of atrial fibrillation: results from the TEMPLAR project. Hypertens Res 2022;45:1486–95. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41440-022-00932-1 94. Seccia TM, Letizia C, Muiesan ML, Lerco S, Cesari M, Bisogni V, et al. Atrial fibrillation as presenting sign of primary aldosteronism: results of the prospective appraisal on the prevalence of primary aldosteronism in hypertensive (PAPPHY) study. J Hypertens 2020;38:332–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002250 95. McDonagh STJ, Mejzner N, Clark CE. Prevalence of postural hypotension in primary, community and institutional care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Fam Pract 2021;22:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01313-8 96. Tran J, Hillebrand SL, Meskers CGM, Iseli RK, Maier AB. Prevalence of initial orthostatic hypotension in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 2021; 50:1520–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afab090 97. Juraschek SP, Hu JR, Cluett JL, Ishak AM, Mita C, Lipsitz LA, et al. Orthostatic hypotension, hypertension treatment, and cardiovascular disease: an individual participant meta-analysis. JAMA 2023;330:1459–71. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.18497 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.86
98. Juraschek SP, Cortez MM, Flack JM, Ghazi L, Kenny RA, Rahman M, et al. Orthostatic hypotension in adults with hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2024;81:e16–30. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp. 0000000000000236 99. Raber I, Belanger MJ, Farahmand R, Aggarwal R, Chiu N, Al Rifai M, et al. Orthostatic hypotension in hypertensive adults: Harry Goldblatt award for early career investigators 2021. Hypertension 2022;79:2388–96. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 122.18557 100. Wieling W, Kaufmann H, Claydon VE, van Wijnen VK, Harms MPM, Juraschek SP, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of orthostatic hypotension. Lancet Neurol 2022;21:735–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00169-7 101. Juraschek SP, Daya N, Rawlings AM, Appel LJ, Miller ER, Windham BG, et al. Association of history of dizziness and long-term adverse outcomes with early vs later orthostatic hypotension assessment times in middle-aged adults. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:1316–23. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.2937 102. Brignole M, Moya A, de Lange FJ, Deharo J-C, Elliott PM, Fanciulli A, et al. Practical instructions for the 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope. Eur Heart J 2018;39:e43–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy071 103. Rivasi G, Groppelli A, Brignole M, Soranna D, Zambon A, Bilo G, et al. Association between hypotension during 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and reflex syncope: the SynABPM 1 study. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3765–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehac347 104. Smith TO, Sillito JA, Goh CH, Abdel-Fattah A-R, Einarsson A, Soiza RL, et al. Association between different methods of assessing blood pressure variability and incident cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality: a systematic review. Age Ageing 2020;49:184–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/ ageing/afz178 105. Kim S, Xiao X, Chen J. Advances in photoplethysmography for personalized cardiovascular monitoring. Biosensors (Basel) 2022;12:863. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12100863 106. Dagamseh A, Qananwah Q, Al Quran H, Shaker Ibrahim K. Towards a portable-noninvasive blood pressure monitoring system utilizing the photoplethysmogram signal. Biomed Opt Express 2021;12:7732–51. https://doi.org/10.1364/boe.444535 107. Sharman JE, Avolio AP, Baulmann J, Benetos A, Blacher J, Blizzard CL, et al. Validation of non-invasive central blood pressure devices: ARTERY Society task force consensus statement on protocol standardization. Eur Heart J 2017;38:2805–12. https://doi. org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw632 108. Sharman JE, O’Brien E, Alpert B, Schutte AE, Delles C, Hecht Olsen M, et al. Lancet Commission on Hypertension group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressure. J Hypertens 2020; 38:21–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002246 109. Lunardi M, Muhammad F, Shahzad A, Nadeem A, Combe L, Simpkin AJ, et al. Performance of wearable watch-type home blood pressure measurement devices in a real-world clinical sample. Clin Res Cardiol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392- 023-02353-7 110. Clark CE, Warren FC, Boddy K, McDonagh STJ, Moore SF, Teresa Alzamora M, et al. Higher arm versus lower arm systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from the INTERPRESS-IPD collaboration. Hypertension 2022;79:2328–35. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18921 111. Margolis KL, Dehmer SP, Sperl-Hillen J, O’Connor PJ, Asche SE, Bergdall AR, et al. Cardiovascular events and costs with home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management for uncontrolled hypertension. Hypertension 2020;76: 1097–103. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15492 112. Sheppard JP, Tucker KL, Davison WJ, Stevens R, Aekplakorn W, Bosworth H B, et al. Self-monitoring of blood pressure in patients with hypertension-related multimorbidity: systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Am J Hypertens 2020;33:243–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpz182 113. Cooke G, Doust J, Sanders S. Is pulse palpation helpful in detecting atrial fibrillation? A systematic review. J Fam Pract 2006;55:130–4. 114. Arvanitis M, Qi G, Bhatt DL, Post WS, Chatterjee N, Battle A, et al. Linear and nonlinear Mendelian randomization analyses of the association between diastolic blood pressure and cardiovascular events: the J-curve revisited. Circulation 2021;143: 895–906. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.049819 115. Whelton SP, McEvoy JW, Shaw L, Psaty BM, Lima JAC, Budoff M, et al. Association of normal systolic blood pressure level with cardiovascular disease in the absence of risk factors. JAMA Cardiol 2020;5:1011–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2020.1731 116. Rahimi K, Bidel Z, Nazarzadeh M, Copland E, Canoy D, Ramakrishnan R, et al. Pharmacological blood pressure lowering for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease across different levels of blood pressure: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021;397:1625–36. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0140-6736(21)00590-0 117. Ji H, Niiranen TJ, Rader F, Henglin M, Kim A, Ebinger JE, et al. Sex differences in blood pressure associations with cardiovascular outcomes. Circulation 2021;143:761–3. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.049360 118. Kringeland E, Tell GS, Midtbø H, Igland J, Haugsgjerd TR, Gerdts E. Stage 1 hypertension, sex, and acute coronary syndromes during midlife: the Hordaland health study. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29:147–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwab068 119. Appel LJ, Moore TJ, Obarzanek E, Vollmer WM, Svetkey LP, Sacks FM, et al. A clinical trial of the effects of dietary patterns on blood pressure. DASH collaborative research group. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1117–24. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199704173361601 120. Toledo E, Hu FB, Estruch R, Buil-Cosiales P, Corella D, Salas-Salvadó J, et al. Effect of the Mediterranean diet on blood pressure in the PREDIMED trial: results from a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med 2013;11:207. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015- 11-207 121. Sundström J, Arima H, Jackson R, Turnbull F, Rahimi K, Chalmers J, et al. Effects of blood pressure reduction in mild hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2015;162:184–91. https://doi.org/10.7326/m14-0773 122. Ettehad D, Emdin CA, Kiran A, Anderson SG, Callender T, Emberson J, et al. Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2016;387:957–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(15)01225-8 123. Muntner P, Whelton PK. Using predicted cardiovascular disease risk in conjunction with blood pressure to guide antihypertensive medication treatment. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:2446–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.066 124. Herrett E, Strongman H, Gadd S, Tomlinson L, Nitsch D, Bhaskaran K, et al. The importance of blood pressure thresholds versus predicted cardiovascular risk on subsequent rates of cardiovascular disease: a cohort study in English primary care. Lancet Healthy Longev 2022;3:e22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2666-7568(21)00281-6 125. Navar AM, Pencina MJ, Peterson ED. Assessing cardiovascular risk to guide hypertension diagnosis and treatment. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:864–71. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamacardio.2016.2861 126. Kovell LC, Ahmed HM, Misra S, Whelton SP, Prokopowicz GP, Blumenthal RS, et al. US hypertension management guidelines: a review of the recent past and recommendations for the future. J Am Heart Assoc 2015;4:e002315. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha. 115.002315 127. McEvoy JW, Martin SS, Dardari ZA, Miedema MD, Sandfort V, Yeboah J, et al. Coronary artery calcium to guide a personalized risk-based approach to initiation and intensification of antihypertensive therapy. Circulation 2017;135:153–65. https:// doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.116.025471 128. Rossello X, Dorresteijn JA, Janssen A, Lambrinou E, Scherrenberg M, Bonnefoy-Cudraz E, et al. Risk prediction tools in cardiovascular disease prevention: a report from the ESC Prevention of CVD Programme led by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) in collaboration with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and the Association of Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions (ACNAP). Eur J Prev Cardiol 2019;26:1534–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487319846715 129. Ioannidis JPA. Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines and in the real world. JAMA 2018;319:115–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jama.2017.19672 130. Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey DE, Collins KJ, Dennison Himmelfarb C, 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. Circulation 2018;138:e484–594. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/cir.0000000000000596 131. Rahimi K, Bidel Z, Nazarzadeh M, Copland E, Canoy D, Wamil M, et al. Age-stratified and blood-pressure-stratified effects of blood-pressure-lowering pharmacotherapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021;398:1053–64. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01921-8 132. Brunström M, Carlberg B. Association of blood pressure lowering with mortality and cardiovascular disease across blood pressure levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2018;178:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamainternmed.2017.6015 133. Arguedas JA, Leiva V, Wright JM. Blood pressure targets in adults with hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;12:CD004349. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD004349.pub3 134. Saiz LC, Gorricho J, Garjón J, Celaya MC, Erviti J, Leache L. Blood pressure targets for the treatment of people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022;11:CD010315. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010315. pub5 135. Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Sink KM, Rocco MV, et al. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med 2015; 373:2103–16. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1511939 136. Zhang W, Zhang S, Deng Y, Wu S, Ren J, Sun G, et al. Trial of intensive blood-pressure control in older patients with hypertension. N Engl J Med 2021;385:1268–79. https:// doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2111437 137. Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, Goff DC Jr, Grimm RH Jr, Cutler JA, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1575–85. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1001286 138. Ferrucci L, Furberg CD, Penninx BW, DiBari M, Williamson JD, Guralnik JM, et al. Treatment of isolated systolic hypertension is most effective in older patients with high-risk profile. Circulation 2001;104:1923–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/hc4101.097520
ESC Guidelines 3997
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.87
139. Leening MJ, Ferket BS, Steyerberg EW, Kavousi M, Deckers JW, Nieboer D, et al. Sex differences in lifetime risk and first manifestation of cardiovascular disease: prospective population based cohort study. BMJ 2014;349:g5992. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5992 140. Ference BA, Bhatt DL, Catapano AL, Packard CJ, Graham I, Kaptoge S, et al. Association of genetic variants related to combined exposure to lower low-density lipoproteins and lower systolic blood pressure with lifetime risk of cardiovascular disease. JAMA 2019;322:1381–91. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.14120 141. Kannel WB. Risk stratification in hypertension: new insights from the Framingham study. Am J Hypertens 2000;13:S3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-7061(99)00252-6 142. Weycker D, Nichols GA, O’Keeffe-Rosetti M, Edelsberg J, Khan Z, Kaura S, et al. Risk-factor clustering and cardiovascular disease risk in hypertensive patients. Am J Hypertens 2007;20:599–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjhyper.2006.10.013 143. Constanti M, Floyd CN, Glover M, Boffa R, Wierzbicki AS, McManus RJ. Cost-effectiveness of initiating pharmacological treatment in stage one hypertension based on 10-year cardiovascular disease risk: a Markov modeling study. Hypertension 2021;77:682–91. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.14913 144. Forouzanfar MH, Liu P, Roth GA, Ng M, Biryukov S, Marczak L, et al. Global burden of hypertension and systolic blood pressure of at least 110 to 115 mm Hg, 1990–2015. JAMA 2017;317:165–82. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.19043 145. Karmali KN, Ning H, Goff DC, Lloyd-Jones DM. Identifying individuals at risk for cardiovascular events across the spectrum of blood pressure levels. J Am Heart Assoc 2015;4:e002126. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.115.002126 146. Liu J, Li Y, Ge J, Yan X, Zhang H, Zheng X, et al. Lowering systolic blood pressure to less than 120 mm Hg versus less than 140 mm Hg in patients with high cardiovascular risk with and without diabetes or previous stroke: an open-label, blinded-outcome, randomised trial. Lancet 2024;404:245–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24) 01028-6 147. Wilson PW, D’Agostino RB, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation 1998; 97:1837–47. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.97.18.1837 148. Sussman J, Vijan S, Hayward R. Using benefit-based tailored treatment to improve the use of antihypertensive medications. Circulation 2013;128:2309–17. https://doi.org/10. 1161/circulationaha.113.002290 149. Karmali KN, Lloyd-Jones DM, van der Leeuw J, Goff DC, Yusuf S, Zanchetti A, et al. Blood pressure-lowering treatment strategies based on cardiovascular risk versus blood pressure: a meta-analysis of individual participant data. PLoS Med 2018;15: e1002538. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002538 150. Gaziano TA, Steyn K, Cohen DJ, Weinstein MC, Opie LH. Cost-effectiveness analysis of hypertension guidelines in South Africa: absolute risk versus blood pressure level. Circulation 2005;112:3569–76. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.535922 151. Basu S, Sussman JB, Hayward RA. Black-white cardiovascular disease disparities after target-based versus personalized benefit-based lipid and blood pressure treatment. MDM Policy Pract 2017;2:2381468317725741. https://doi.org/10. 1177/2381468317725741 152. Go AS, Chertow GM, Fan D, McCulloch CE, Hsu CY. Chronic kidney disease and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. N Engl J Med 2004;351: 1296–305. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa041031 153. Klooster CCV, Bhatt DL, Steg PG, Massaro JM, Dorresteijn JAN, Westerink J, et al. Predicting 10-year risk of recurrent cardiovascular events andcardiovascular interventions in patients with established cardiovascular disease: results from UCC-SMART and REACH. Int J Cardiol 2021;325:140–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.09.053 154. Kaasenbrood L, Boekholdt SM, van der Graaf Y, Ray KK, Peters RJG, Kastelein JJP, et al. Distribution of estimated 10-year risk of recurrent vascular events and residual risk in a secondary prevention population. Circulation 2016;134:1419–29. https://doi.org/10. 1161/circulationaha.116.021314 155. Eisen A, Bhatt DL, Steg PG, Eagle KA, Goto S, Guo J, et al. Angina and future cardiovascular events in stable patients with coronary artery disease: insights from the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e004080. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.116.004080 156. Taylor CJ, Roalfe AK, Iles R, Hobbs FD. Ten-year prognosis of heart failure in the community: follow-up data from the Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening (ECHOES) study. Eur J Heart Fail 2012;14:176–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjhf/hfr170 157. Shah KS, Xu H, Matsouaka RA, Bhatt DL, Heidenreich PA, Hernandez AF, et al. Heart failure with preserved, borderline, and reduced ejection fraction: 5–year outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:2476–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.08.074 158. Benjamin EJ, Wolf PA, D’Agostino RB, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB, Levy D. Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: the Framingham heart study. Circulation 1998; 98:946–52. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.98.10.946 159. Pandey A, Patel KV, Vongpatanasin W, Ayers C, Berry JD, Mentz RJ, et al. Incorporation of biomarkers into risk assessment for allocation of antihypertensive medication according to the 2017 ACC/AHA high blood pressure guideline: a pooled cohort analysis. Circulation 2019;140:2076–88. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.119.043337 160. Mulnier HE, Seaman HE, Raleigh VS, Soedamah-Muthu SS, Colhoun HM, Lawrenson RA, et al. Risk of myocardial infarction in men and women with type 2 diabetes in the UK: a cohort study using the general practice research database. Diabetologia 2008;51:1639–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-008-1076-y 161. Soedamah-Muthu SS, Fuller JH, Mulnier HE, Raleigh VS, Lawrenson RA, Colhoun HM. High risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes in the U.K.: a cohort study using the general practice research database. Diabetes Care 2006;29:798–804. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.29.04.06.dc05-1433 162. Wong ND, Glovaci D, Wong K, Malik S, Franklin SS, Wygant G, et al. Global cardiovascular disease risk assessment in United States adults with diabetes. Diab Vasc Dis Res 2012;9:146–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1479164112436403 163. Paquette M, Bernard S, Cariou B, Hegele RA, Genest J, Trinder M, et al. Familial hypercholesterolemia-risk-score: a new score predicting cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality in familial hypercholesterolemia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2021;41:2632–40. https://doi.org/10.1161/atvbaha.121.316106 164. SCORE2-Diabetes Working Group and the ESC Cardiovascular Risk Collaboration. SCORE2-Diabetes: 10-year cardiovascular risk estimation in type 2 diabetes in Europe. Eur Heart J 2023;44:2544–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ ehad260 165. SCORE Working Group and the ESC Cardiovascular Risk Collaboration. SCORE2 risk prediction algorithms: new models to estimate 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Europe. Eur Heart J 2021;42:2439–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab309 166. SCORE OP working group and ESC Cardiovascular Risk Collaboration. SCORE2-OP risk prediction algorithms: estimating incident cardiovascular event risk in older persons in four geographical risk regions. Eur Heart J 2021;42:2455–67. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab312 167. Pignone M, Phillips CJ, Elasy TA, Fernandez A. Physicians’ ability to predict the risk of coronary heart disease. BMC Health Serv Res 2003;3:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472- 6963-3-13 168. Grover SA, Lowensteyn I, Esrey KL, Steinert Y, Joseph L, Abrahamowicz M. Do doctors accurately assess coronary risk in their patients? Preliminary results of the coronary health assessment study. BMJ 1995;310:975–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.310. 6985.975 169. Friedmann PD, Brett AS, Mayo-Smith MF. Differences in generalists’ and cardiologists’ perceptions of cardiovascular risk and the outcomes of preventive therapy in cardiovascular disease. Ann Intern Med 1996;124:414–21. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003- 4819-124-4-199602150-00005 170. Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, et al. ESC guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J 2021;42: 3227–337. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab484 171. Xie X, Atkins E, Lv J, Bennett A, Neal B, Ninomiya T, et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular and renal outcomes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2016;387:435–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15) 00805-3 172. Herrett E, Gadd S, Jackson R, Bhaskaran K, Williamson E, van Staa T, et al. Eligibility and subsequent burden of cardiovascular disease of four strategies for blood pressurelowering treatment: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2019;394:663–71. https:// doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31359-5 173. Matsushita K, Kaptoge S, Hageman SHJ, Sang Y, Ballew SH, Grams ME, et al. Including measures of chronic kidney disease to improve cardiovascular risk prediction by SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2023;30:8–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurjpc/zwac176 174. Gerdts E, Sudano I, Brouwers S, Borghi C, Bruno RM, Ceconi C, et al. Sex differences in arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J 2022;43:4777–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ ehac470 175. Brown MC, Best KE, Pearce MS, Waugh J, Robson SC, Bell R. Cardiovascular disease risk in women with pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol 2013;28:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9762-6 176. Honigberg MC, Zekavat SM, Aragam K, Klarin D, Bhatt DL, Scott NS, et al. Long-term cardiovascular risk in women with hypertension during pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:2743–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.052 177. Leon LJ, McCarthy FP, Direk K, Gonzalez-Izquierdo A, Prieto-Merino D, Casas JP, et al. Preeclampsia and cardiovascular disease in a large UK pregnancy cohort of linked electronic health records: a CALIBER study. Circulation 2019;140:1050–60. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/circulationaha.118.038080 178. Haug EB, Horn J, Markovitz AR, Fraser A, Klykken B, Dalen H, et al. Association of conventional cardiovascular risk factors with cardiovascular disease after hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: analysis of the Nord-Trøndelag health study. JAMA Cardiol 2019; 4:628–35. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1746 179. Wu P, Haththotuwa R, Kwok CS, Babu A, Kotronias RA, Rushton C, et al. Preeclampsia and future cardiovascular health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2017;10:e003497. https://doi.org/10. 1161/circoutcomes.116.003497 180. Kramer CK, Campbell S, Retnakaran R. Gestational diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular disease in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 2019;62: 905–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-019-4840-2 181. Kyriacou H, Al-Mohammad A, Muehlschlegel C, Foster-Davies L, Bruco MEF, Legard C, et al. The risk of cardiovascular diseases after miscarriage, stillbirth, and induced abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Open 2022;2:oeac065. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oeac065 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.88
182. Kessous R, Shoham-Vardi I, Pariente G, Holcberg G, Sheiner E. An association between preterm delivery and long-term maternal cardiovascular morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:368.e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.05.041 183. Markovitz AR, Stuart JJ, Horn J, Williams PL, Rimm EB, Missmer SA, et al. Does pregnancy complication history improve cardiovascular disease risk prediction? Findings from the HUNT study in Norway. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1113–20. https://doi.org/10. 1093/eurheartj/ehy863 184. Saei Ghare Naz M, Sheidaei A, Aflatounian A, Azizi F, Ramezani Tehrani F. Does adding adverse pregnancy outcomes improve the Framingham cardiovascular risk score in women? Data from the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11: e022349. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.121.022349 185. Gladstone RA, Pudwell J, Nerenberg KA, Grover SA, Smith GN. Cardiovascular risk assessment and follow-up of women after hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a prospective cohort study. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2019;41:1157–67.e1. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jogc.2018.10.024 186. Patel AP, Wang M, Kartoun U, Ng K, Khera AV. Quantifying and understanding the higher risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease among South Asian individuals: results from the UK Biobank prospective cohort study. Circulation 2021;144:410–22. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.052430 187. Tillin T, Hughes AD, Whincup P, Mayet J, Sattar N, McKeigue PM, et al. Ethnicity and prediction of cardiovascular disease: performance of QRISK2 and Framingham scores in a U.K. tri-ethnic prospective cohort study (SABRE—Southall And Brent REvisited). Heart 2014;100:60–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304474 188. Rabanal KS, Igland J, Tell GS, Jenum AK, Klemsdal TO, Ariansen I, et al. Validation of the cardiovascular risk model NORRISK 2 in South Asians and people with diabetes. Scand Cardiovasc J 2021;55:56–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14017431.2020.1821909 189. Veronesi G, Gianfagna F, Giampaoli S, Chambless LE, Mancia G, Cesana G, et al. Improving long-term prediction of first cardiovascular event: the contribution of family history of coronary heart disease and social status. Prev Med 2014;64:75–80. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.007 190. Sivapalaratnam S, Boekholdt SM, Trip MD, Sandhu MS, Luben R, Kastelein JJP, et al. Family history of premature coronary heart disease and risk prediction in the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population study. Heart 2010;96:1985–9. https://doi.org/ 10.1136/hrt.2010.210740 191. Kimenai DM, Pirondini L, Gregson J, Prieto D, Pocock SJ, Perel P, et al. Socioeconomic deprivation: an important, largely unrecognized risk factor in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Circulation 2022;146:240–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.122.060042 192. Avina-Zubieta JA, Thomas J, Sadatsafavi M, Lehman AJ, Lacaille D. Risk of incident cardiovascular events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1524–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis- 2011-200726 193. Crowson CS, Matteson EL, Roger VL, Therneau TM, Gabriel SE. Usefulness of risk scores to estimate the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:420–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.03.044 194. Arts EE, Popa C, Den Broeder AA, Semb A G, Toms T, Kitas G D, et al. Performance of four current risk algorithms in predicting cardiovascular events in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:668–74. https://doi.org/10.1136/ annrheumdis-2013-204024 195. Arts EE, Popa CD, Den Broeder AA, Donders R, Sandoo A, Toms T, et al. Prediction of cardiovascular risk in rheumatoid arthritis: performance of original and adapted SCORE algorithms. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:674–80. https://doi.org/10.1136/ annrheumdis-2014-206879 196. Gelfand JM, Neimann AL, Shin DB, Wang X, Margolis DJ, Troxel AB. Risk of myocardial infarction in patients with psoriasis. JAMA 2006;296:1735–41. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jama.296.14.1735 197. Miller IM, Ellervik C, Yazdanyar S, Jemec GB. Meta-analysis of psoriasis, cardiovascular disease, and associated risk factors. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013;69:1014–24. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jaad.2013.06.053 198. Eder L, Chandran V, Gladman DD. The Framingham risk score underestimates the extent of subclinical atherosclerosis in patients with psoriatic disease. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:1990–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203433 199. Armstrong EJ, Harskamp CT, Armstrong AW. Psoriasis and major adverse cardiovascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000062. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.113.000062 200. Elmets CA, Leonardi CL, Davis DMR, Gelfand JM, Lichten J, Mehta NN, et al. Joint AAD-NPF guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with awareness and attention to comorbidities. J Am Acad Dermatol 2019;80:1073–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.11.058 201. Lu X, Wang Y, Zhang J, Pu D, Hu N, Luo J, et al. Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus face a high risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Immunopharmacol 2021;94:107466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2021.107466 202. Drosos GC, Konstantonis G, Sfikakis PP, Tektonidou MG. Underperformance of clinical risk scores in identifying vascular ultrasound-based high cardiovascular risk in systemic lupus erythematosus. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2047487320906650 203. Shah ASV, Stelzle D, Lee KK, Beck EJ, Alam S, Clifford S, et al. Global burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in people living with HIV: systematic review and meta-analysis. Circulation 2018;138:1100–12. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.117.033369 204. Triant VA, Perez J, Regan S, Massaro JM, Meigs JB, Grinspoon SK, et al. Cardiovascular risk prediction functions underestimate risk in HIV infection. Circulation 2018;137: 2203–14. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.117.028975 205. Triant VA, Lyass A, Hurley LB, Borowsky LH, Ehrbar RQ, H W, et al. Cardiovascular Risk Estimation Is Suboptimal in People With HIV. J Am Heart Assoc. 2024;13:e029228. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.029228 206. Correll CU, Solmi M, Veronese N, Bortolato B, Rosson S, Santonastaso P, et al. Prevalence, incidence and mortality from cardiovascular disease in patients with pooled and specific severe mental illness: a large-scale meta-analysis of 3,211,768 patients and 113,383,368 controls. World Psychiatry 2017;16:163–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20420 207. Lambert AM, Parretti HM, Pearce E, Price MJ, Riley M, Ryan R, et al. Temporal trends in associations between severe mental illness and risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2022;19:e1003960. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pmed.1003960 208. Cunningham R, Poppe K, Peterson D, Every-Palmer S, Soosay I, Jackson R. Prediction of cardiovascular disease risk among people with severe mental illness: a cohort study. PLoS One 2019;14:e0221521. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221521 209. Yeboah J, Young R, McClelland RL, Delaney JC, Polonsky TS, Dawood FZ, et al. Utility of nontraditional risk markers in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:139–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.058 210. Akintoye E, Afonso L, Bengaluru Jayanna M, Bao W, Briasoulis A, Robinson J, et al. Prognostic utility of risk enhancers and coronary artery calcium score recommended in the 2018 ACC/AHA multisociety cholesterol treatment guidelines over the pooled cohort equation: insights from 3 large prospective cohorts. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10: e019589. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.120.019589 211. Peters SA, den Ruijter HM, Bots ML, Moons KG. Improvements in risk stratification for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease by imaging subclinical atherosclerosis: a systematic review. Heart 2012;98:177–84. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300747 212. Nicolaides AN, Panayiotou AG, Griffin M, Tyllis T, Bond D, Georgiou N, et al. Arterial ultrasound testing to predict atherosclerotic cardiovascular events. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;79:1969–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.03.352 213. Laclaustra M, Casasnovas JA, Fernández-Ortiz A, Fuster V, León-Latre M, Jiménez-Borreguero LJ, et al. Femoral and carotid subclinical atherosclerosis association with risk factors and coronary calcium: the AWHS study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:1263–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.056 214. López-Melgar B, Fernández-Friera L, Oliva B, García-Ruiz JM, Peñalvo JL, Gómez-Talavera S, et al. Subclinical atherosclerosis burden by 3D ultrasound in midlife: the PESA study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:301–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc. 2017.05.033 215. Ben-Shlomo Y, Spears M, Boustred C, May M, Anderson SG, Benjamin EJ, et al. Aortic pulse wave velocity improves cardiovascular event prediction: an individual participant meta-analysis of prospective observational data from 17,635 subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:636–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.09.063 216. Ohkuma T, Ninomiya T, Tomiyama H, Kario K, Hoshide S, Kita Y, et al. Brachial-Ankle pulse wave velocity and the risk prediction of cardiovascular disease: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Hypertension 2017;69:1045–52. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.117.09097 217. Stone K, Veerasingam D, Meyer ML, Heffernan KS, Higgins S, Maria Bruno R, et al. Reimagining the value of brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity as a biomarker of cardiovascular disease risk-a call to action on behalf of VascAgeNet. Hypertension 2023;80: 1980–92. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21314 218. An DW, Hansen TW, Aparicio LS, Chori B, Huang Q-F, Wei F-F, et al. Derivation of an outcome-driven threshold for aortic pulse wave velocity: an individual-participant meta-analysis. Hypertension 2023;80:1949–59. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 123.21318 219. de Lemos JA, Ayers CR, Levine BD, deFilippi CR, Wang TJ, Hundley W, et al. Multimodality strategy for cardiovascular risk assessment: performance in 2 population-based cohorts. Circulation 2017;135:2119–32. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.117.027272 220. Hageman SHJ, Petitjean C, Pennells L, Kaptoge S, Pajouheshnia R, Tillmann T, et al. Improving 10-year cardiovascular risk prediction in apparently healthy people: flexible addition of risk modifiers on top of SCORE2. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2023;30:1705–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwad187 221. McEvoy JW, Chen Y, Nambi V, Ballantyne CM, Sharrett AR, Appel LJ, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and risk of hypertension. Circulation 2015;132: 825–33. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.114.014364 222. Hussain A, Sun W, Deswal A, de Lemos JA, McEvoy JW, Hoogeveen RC, et al. Association of NT-ProBNP, blood pressure, and cardiovascular events: the ARIC study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:559–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.063 223. Stuart JJ, Tanz LJ, Cook NR, Spiegelman D, Missmer SA, Rimm EB, et al. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and 10-year cardiovascular risk prediction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:1252–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.05.077
ESC Guidelines 3999
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.89
224. Timpka S, Fraser A, Schyman T, Stuart JJ, Åsvold BO, Mogren I, et al. The value of pregnancy complication history for 10-year cardiovascular disease risk prediction in middle-aged women. Eur J Epidemiol 2018;33:1003–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10654-018-0429-1 225. Blankenberg S, Salomaa V, Makarova N, Ojeda F, Wild P, Lackner KJ, et al. Troponin I and cardiovascular risk prediction in the general population: the BiomarCaRE consortium. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2428–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw172 226. Zeller T, Tunstall-Pedoe H, Saarela O, Ojeda F, Schnabel RB, Tuovinen T, et al. High population prevalence of cardiac troponin I measured by a high-sensitivity assay and cardiovascular risk estimation: the MORGAM biomarker project Scottish cohort. Eur Heart J 2014;35:271–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/eht406 227. Schoenthaler AM, Lancaster KJ, Chaplin W, Butler M, Forsyth J, Ogedegbe G, et al. Cluster randomized clinical trial of FAITH (faith-based approaches in the treatment of hypertension) in blacks. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2018;11:e004691. https:// doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.118.004691 228. Beaney T, Schutte AE, Stergiou GS, Borghi C, Burger D, Charchar F, et al. May Measurement Month 2019: the global blood pressure screening campaign of the international society of Hypertension. Hypertension 2020;76:333–41. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.120.14874 229. Victor RG, Lynch K, Li N, Blyler C, Muhammad E, Handler J, et al. A cluster-randomized trial of blood-pressure reduction in black barbershops. N Engl J Med 2018;378: 1291–301. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1717250 230. Sun Y, Mu J, Wang DW, Ouyang N, Xing L, Guo X, et al. A village doctor-led multifaceted intervention for blood pressure control in rural China: an open, cluster randomised trial. Lancet 2022;399:1964–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00325-7 231. Schmidt BM, Durao S, Toews I, Bavuma CM, Hohlfeld A, Nury E, et al. Screening strategies for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;5:CD013212. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/14651858.CD013212.pub2 232. Kaczorowski J, Chambers LW, Dolovich L, Paterson JM, Karwalajtys T, Gierman T, et al. Improving cardiovascular health at population level: 39 community cluster randomised trial of Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP). BMJ 2011;342: d442. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d442 233. Lindholt JS, Søgaard R, Rasmussen LM, Mejldal A, Lambrechtsen J, Steffensen FH, et al. Five-year outcomes of the Danish cardiovascular screening (DANCAVAS) trial. N Engl J Med 2022;387:1385–94. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2208681 234. Sheppard JP, Schwartz CL, Tucker KL, McManus RJ. Modern management and diagnosis of hypertension in the United Kingdom: home care and self-care. Ann Glob Health 2016;82:274–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aogh.2016.02.005 235. Andersson H, Hedström L, Bergman S, Bergh H. The outcome of two-step blood pressure screening in dental healthcare. Scand J Public Health 2018;46:623–9. https://doi. org/10.1177/1403494818759840 236. Zhang H, Thijs L, Kuznetsova T, Fagard RH, Li X, Staessen JA. Progression to hypertension in the non-hypertensive participants in the Flemish study on environment, genes and health outcomes. J Hypertens 2006;24:1719–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/ 01.hjh.0000242395.07473.92 237. Conen D, Aeschbacher S, Thijs L, Li Y, Boggia J, Asayama K, et al. Age-specific differences between conventional and ambulatory daytime blood pressure values. Hypertension 2014;64:1073–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.114.03957 238. Karnjanapiboonwong A, Anothaisintawee T, Chaikledkaew U, Dejthevaporn C, Attia J, Thakkinstian A. Diagnostic performance of clinic and home blood pressure measurements compared with ambulatory blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2020;20:491. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872- 020-01736-2 239. Viera AJ, Yano Y, Lin FC, Simel DL, Yun J, Dave G, et al. Does this adult patient have hypertension?: The rational clinical examination systematic review. JAMA 2021;326: 339–47. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.4533 240. Green BB, Anderson ML, Cook AJ, Ehrlich K, Hall YN, Hsu C, et al. Clinic, home, and kiosk blood pressure measurements for diagnosing hypertension: a randomized diagnostic study. J Gen Intern Med 2022;37:2948–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022- 07400-z 241. Kim JS, Rhee MY, Kim CH, Kim YR, Do U, Kim J-H, et al. Algorithm for diagnosing hypertension using out-of-office blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2021;23:1965–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.14382 242. van den Born BH, Lip GYH, Brguljan-Hitij J, Cremer A, Segura J, Morales E, et al. ESC Council on Hypertension position document on the management of hypertensive emergencies. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2019;5:37–46. https://doi.org/10. 1093/ehjcvp/pvy032 243. Ross S, Walker A, MacLeod MJ. Patient compliance in hypertension: role of illness perceptions and treatment beliefs. J Hum Hypertens 2004;18:607–13. https://doi.org/10. 1038/sj.jhh.1001721 244. Hagger MS, Koch S, Chatzisarantis NLD, Orbell S. The common sense model of selfregulation: meta-analysis and test of a process model. Psychol Bull 2017;143:1117–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000118 245. Meyer D, Leventhal H, Gutmann M. Common-sense models of illness: the example of hypertension. Health Psychol 1985;4:115–35. https://doi.org/10.1037// 0278-6133.4.2.115 246. O’Carroll RE, Chambers JA, Dennis M, Sudlow C, Johnston M. Improving adherence to medication in stroke survivors: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Ann Behav Med 2013;46:358–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9515-5 247. Hollands GJ, Usher-Smith JA, Hasan R, Alexander F, Clarke N, Griffin SJ. Visualising health risks with medical imaging for changing recipients’ health behaviours and risk factors: systematic review with meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2022;19:e1003920. https:// doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003920 248. Burnier M. Medication adherence and persistence as the cornerstone of effective antihypertensive therapy. Am J Hypertens 2006;19:1190–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. amjhyper.2006.04.006 249. Parati G, Goncalves A, Soergel D, Bruno RM, Caiani EG, Gerdts E. New perspectives for hypertension management: progress in methodological and technological developments. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2023;30:48–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwac203 250. Naderi SH, Bestwick JP, Wald DS. Adherence to drugs that prevent cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis on 376,162 patients. Am J Med 2012;125:882–7.e1. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.12.013 251. Chang TE, Ritchey MD, Park S, Chang A, Odom EC, Durthaler J, et al. National rates of nonadherence to antihypertensive medications among insured adults with hypertension, 2015. Hypertension 2019;74:1324–32. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 119.13616 252. Qvarnström M, Kahan T, Kieler H, Brandt L, Hasselström J, Bengtsson Boström K, et al. Persistence to antihypertensive drug treatment in Swedish primary healthcare. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2013;69:1955–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-013-1555-z 253. Burnier M, Egan BM. Adherence in hypertension. Circ Res 2019;124:1124–40. https:// doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.118.313220 254. Curneen JMG, Rabbitt L, Browne D, O’Donoghue DF, Alansari Y, Harhen B, et al. Major disparities in patient-reported adherence compared to objective assessment of adherence using mass spectrometry: a prospective study in a tertiary-referral hypertension clinic. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2022;89:1948–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15292 255. Corrao G, Parodi A, Nicotra F, Zambon A, Merlino L, Cesana G, et al. Better compliance to antihypertensive medications reduces cardiovascular risk. J Hypertens 2011;29: 610–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e328342ca97 256. Kim S, Shin DW, Yun JM, Hwang Y, Park SK, Ko Y-J, et al. Medication adherence and the risk of cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization among patients with newly prescribed antihypertensive medications. Hypertension 2016;67:506–12. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.06731 257. Lane D, Lawson A, Burns A, Azizi M, Burnier M, Jones DJL, et al. Nonadherence in hypertension: how to develop and implement chemical adherence testing. Hypertension 2022;79:12–23. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.17596 258. Marshall IJ, Wolfe CD, McKevitt C. Lay perspectives on hypertension and drug adherence: systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ 2012;345:e3953. https://doi.org/ 10.1136/bmj.e3953 259. Schoenthaler A, Knafl GJ, Fiscella K, Ogedegbe G. Addressing the social needs of hypertensive patients: the role of patient–provider communication as a predictor of medication adherence. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2017;10:e003659. https://doi. org/10.1161/circoutcomes.117.003659 260. Schmieder RE, Wassmann S, Predel HG, Weisser B, Blettenberg J, Gillessen A, et al. Improved persistence to medication, decreased cardiovascular events and reduced allcause mortality in hypertensive patients with use of single-pill combinations: results from the START-study. Hypertension 2023;80:1127–35. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.122.20810 261. Ruzicka M, Leenen FHH, Ramsay T, Bugeja A, Edwards C, McCormick B, et al. Use of directly observed therapy to assess treatment adherence in patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension. JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:1433–4. https://doi. org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1455 262. Pio-Abreu A, Trani-Ferreira F, Silva GV, Bortolotto LA, Drager LF. Directly observed therapy for resistant/refractory hypertension diagnosis and blood pressure control. Heart 2022;108:1952–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2022-320802 263. Tomaszewski M, White C, Patel P, Masca N, Damani R, Hepworth J, et al. High rates of non-adherence to antihypertensive treatment revealed by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HP LC-MS/MS) urine analysis. Heart 2014;100:855–61. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2013-305063 264. Forette F, Seux ML, Staessen JA, et al. The prevention of dementia with antihypertensive treatment: new evidence from the systolic hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) study. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:2046–52. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.162.18.2046 265. Näslund U, Ng N, Lundgren A, Fhärm E, Grönlund C, Johansson H, et al. Visualization of asymptomatic atherosclerotic disease for optimum cardiovascular prevention (VIPVIZA): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019;393: 133–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32818-6 266. Bengtsson A, Norberg M, Ng N, Carlberg B, Grönlund C, Hultdin J, et al. The beneficial effect over 3 years by pictorial information to patients and their physician about subclinical atherosclerosis and cardiovascular risk: results from the VIPVIZA randomized clinical trial. Am J Prev Cardiol 2021;7:100199. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ajpc.2021.100199 267. Sjölander M, Carlberg B, Norberg M, Näslund U, Ng N. Prescription of lipid-lowering and antihypertensive drugs following pictorial information about subclinical Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.90
atherosclerosis: a secondary outcome of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 2021;4:e2121683. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.21683 268. Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Monteduro C, Bonzi B, Paini A, Viola S, et al. Left ventricular concentric geometry during treatment adversely affects cardiovascular prognosis in hypertensive patients. Hypertension 2004;43:731–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP. 0000121223.44837.de 269. Guerin AP, Blacher J, Pannier B, Marchais SJ, Safar ME, London GM, et al. Impact of aortic stiffness attenuation on survival of patients in end-stage renal failure. Circulation 2001;103:987–92. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.103.7.987 270. Cardoso CRL, Salles GF. Prognostic value of changes in aortic stiffness for cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in resistant hypertension: a cohort study. Hypertension 2022;79:447–56. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18498 271. Laurent S, Chatellier G, Azizi M, Calvet D, Choukroun G, Danchin N, et al. SPARTE study: normalization of arterial stiffness and cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension at medium to very high risk. Hypertension 2021;78:983–95. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.17579 272. Levin A, Stevens PE, Bilous RW, Coresh J, De Francisco ALM, De Jong PE, et al. Summary of recommendation statements. Kidney Int Suppl (2011) 2013;3:5–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/kisup.2012.77 273. Matsushita K, Coresh J, Sang Y, Chalmers J, Fox C, Guallar E, et al. Estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria for prediction of cardiovascular outcomes: a collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015;3: 514–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(15)00040-6 274. Cheung AK, Rahman M, Reboussin DM, Craven TE, Greene T, Kimmel PL, et al. Effects of intensive BP control in CKD. J Am Soc Nephrol 2017;28:2812–23. https://doi.org/10. 1681/asn.2017020148 275. Malhotra R, Nguyen HA, Benavente O, Mete M, Howard BV, Mant J, et al. Association between more intensive vs less intensive blood pressure lowering and risk of mortality in chronic kidney disease stages 3 to 5: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:1498–505. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4377 276. Stevens PE, Levin A. Evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease: synopsis of the kidney disease: improving global outcomes 2012 clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2013;158:825–30. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-158- 11-201306040-00007 277. Aboyans V, Ricco JB, Bartelink MEL, Björck M, Brodmann M, Cohnert T, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed by: the European Stroke Organization (ESO) The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J 2018;39:763–816. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095 278. Iribarren C, Round AD, Lu M, Okin PM, McNulty EJ. Cohort study of ECG left ventricular hypertrophy trajectories: ethnic disparities, associations with cardiovascular outcomes, and clinical utility. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e004954. https://doi.org/10. 1161/jaha.116.004954 279. Okin PM, Devereux RB, Jern S, Kjeldsen SE, Julius S, Dahlöf B. Baseline characteristics in relation to electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients: the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) in hypertension study. Hypertension 2000;36:766–73. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.36.5.766 280. Okin PM, Oikarinen L, Viitasalo M, Toivonen L, Kjeldsen SE, Nieminen MS, et al. Prognostic value of changes in the electrocardiographic strain pattern during antihypertensive treatment: the Losartan Intervention for End-point reduction in hypertension study (LIFE). Circulation 2009;119:1883–91. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.108.812313 281. Lehtonen AO, Puukka P, Varis J, Porthan K, Tikkanen JT, Nieminen MS, et al. Prevalence and prognosis of ECG abnormalities in normotensive and hypertensive individuals. J Hypertens 2016;34:959–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000882 282. Pewsner D, Jüni P, Egger M, Battaglia M, Sundström J, Bachmann LM. Accuracy of electrocardiography in diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in arterial hypertension: systematic review. BMJ 2007;335:711. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39276.636354.AE 283. Kuznetsova T, Thijs L, Knez J, Cauwenberghs N, Petit T, Gu Y-M. Longitudinal changes in left ventricular diastolic function in a general population. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;8:e002882. https://doi.org/10.1161/circimaging.114.002882 284. Zhao L, Zierath R, Claggett B, Dorbala P, Matsushita K, Kitzman D. Longitudinal changes in left ventricular diastolic function in late life: the ARIC study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2023;16:1133–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.02.022 285. Redfield MM, Jacobsen SJ, Burnett JC Jr, Mahoney DW, Bailey KR, Rodeheffer RJ. Burden of systolic and diastolic ventricular dysfunction in the community: appreciating the scope of the heart failure epidemic. JAMA 2003;289:194–202. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jama.289.2.194 286. Sundström J, Lind L, Arnlöv J, Zethelius B, Andrén B, Lithell HO. Echocardiographic and electrocardiographic diagnoses of left ventricular hypertrophy predict mortality independently of each other in a population of elderly men. Circulation 2001;103:2346–51. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.103.19.2346 287. Seko Y, Kato T, Yamaji Y, Haruna Y, Nakane E, Haruna T, et al. Discrepancy between left ventricular hypertrophy by echocardiography and electrocardiographic hypertrophy: clinical characteristics and outcomes. Open Heart 2021;8:e001765. https:// doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2021-001765 288. Modin D, Biering-Sørensen SR, Mogelvang R, Landler N, Jensen JS, Biering-Sørensen T. Prognostic value of echocardiography in hypertensive versus nonhypertensive participants from the general population. Hypertension 2018;71:742–51. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.117.10674 289. Armstrong AC, Jacobs DR Jr, Gidding SS, Colangelo LA, Gjesdal O, Lewis CE, et al. Framingham score and LV mass predict events in young adults: CARDIA study. Int J Cardiol 2014;172:350–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.01.003 290. Kuznetsova T, Thijs L, Knez J, Herbots L, Zhang Z, Staessen JA. Prognostic value of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in a general population. J Am Heart Assoc 2014;3: e000789. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.114.000789 291. Marwick TH, Gillebert TC, Aurigemma G, et al. Recommendations on the use of echocardiography in adult hypertension: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;16:577–605. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/ jev076 292. Douglas PS, Garcia MJ, Haines DE, Lai WW, Manning WJ, Patel AR, et al. ACCF/ASE/ AHA/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR 2011 appropriate use criteria for echocardiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation appropriate use criteria task force, American Society of Echocardiography, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance American College of Chest Physicians. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2011;24:229–67. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.echo.2010.12.008 293. van Rosendael AR, Bax AM, Smit JM, van den Hoogen IJ, Ma X, Al’Aref S, et al. Clinical risk factors and atherosclerotic plaque extent to define risk for major events in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease: the long-term coronary computed tomography angiography CONFIRM registry. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;21: 479–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jez322 294. Mehta A, Pandey A, Ayers CR, Khera A, Sperling LS, Szklo M, et al. Predictive value of coronary artery calcium score categories for coronary events versus strokes: impact of sex and race: MESA and DHS. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13:e010153. https://doi. org/10.1161/circimaging.119.010153 295. Bengtsson A, Lindvall K, Norberg M, Fhärm E. Increased knowledge makes a difference! —general practitioners’ experiences of pictorial information about subclinical atherosclerosis for primary prevention: an interview study from the VIPVIZA trial. Scand J Prim Health Care 2021;39:77–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2021.1882083 296. Ibanez B, Fernández-Ortiz A, Fernández-Friera L, García-Lunar I, Andrés V, Fuster V. Progression of early subclinical atherosclerosis (PESA) study: JACC focus seminar 7/8. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;78:156–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.05.011 297. Den Ruijter HM, Peters SA, Anderson TJ, Britton AR, Dekker JM, Eijkemans MJ. Common carotid intima-media thickness measurements in cardiovascular risk prediction: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2012;308:796–803. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jama.2012.9630 298. Downie LE, Hodgson LA, DSylva C, McIntosh RL, Rogers SL, Connell P, et al. Hypertensive retinopathy: comparing the Keith-Wagener-Barker to a simplified classification. J Hypertens 2013;31:960–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835efea3 299. Liew G, Xie J, Nguyen H, Keay L, Kamran Ikram M, McGeechan K, et al. Hypertensive retinopathy and cardiovascular disease risk: 6 population-based cohorts meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev 2023;17:200180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcrp. 2023.200180 300. Padmanabhan S, Caulfield M, Dominiczak AF. Genetic and molecular aspects of hypertension. Circ Res 2015;116:937–59. https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.116.303647 301. Casey R, Neumann HPH, Maher ER. Genetic stratification of inherited and sporadic phaeochromocytoma and paraganglioma: implications for precision medicine. Hum Mol Genet 2020;29:R128–137. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddaa201 302. Rossi GP, Ceolotto G, Caroccia B, Lenzini L. Genetic screening in arterial hypertension. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2017;13:289–98. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrendo.2016.196 303. Cascón A, Calsina B, Monteagudo M, Mellid S, Díaz-Talavera A, Currás-Freixes M, et al. Genetic bases of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Mol Endocrinol 2023;70: e220167. https://doi.org/10.1530/jme-22-0167 304. Staessen JA, Wang J, Bianchi G, Birkenhäger WH. Essential hypertension. Lancet 2003; 361:1629–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(03)13302-8 305. Lenders JW, Duh QY, Eisenhofer G, Gimenez-Roqueplo A-P, Grebe SKG, Murad MH, et al. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2014;99:1915–42. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2014-1498 306. Poulter NR, Prabhakaran D, Caulfield M. Hypertension. Lancet 2015;386:801–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61468-9 307. Mills KT, Bundy JD, Kelly TN, Reed JE, Kearney PM, Reynolds K, et al. Global disparities of hypertension prevalence and control: a systematic analysis of population-based
ESC Guidelines 4001
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.91
studies from 90 countries. Circulation 2016;134:441–50. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.115.018912 308. Wei FF, Zhang ZY, Huang QF, Staessen JA. Diagnosis and management of resistant hypertension: state of the art. Nat Rev Nephrol 2018;14:428–41. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41581-018-0006-6 309. Carey RM, Calhoun DA, Bakris GL, Brook RD, Daugherty SL, Dennison-Himmelfarb Cheryl R, et al. Resistant hypertension: detection, evaluation, and management: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2018;72: e53–90. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp.0000000000000084 310. Carey RM, Sakhuja S, Calhoun DA, Whelton PK, Muntner P. Prevalence of apparent treatment-resistant hypertension in the United States. Hypertension 2019;73: 424–31. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.118.12191 311. Vongpatanasin W. Resistant hypertension: a review of diagnosis and management. JAMA 2014;311:2216–24. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.5180 312. Azizi M, Sapoval M, Gosse P, Monge M, Bobrie G, Delsart P, et al. Optimum and stepped care standardised antihypertensive treatment with or without renal denervation for resistant hypertension (DENERHTN): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;385:1957–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14) 61942-5 313. Rossi GP, Bernini G, Caliumi C, Desideri G, Fabris B, Ferri C, et al. A prospective study of the prevalence of primary aldosteronism in 1,125 hypertensive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2293–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.059 314. Pedrosa RP, Drager LF, Gonzaga CC, Sousa MG, de Paula LKG, Amaro ACS, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea: the most common secondary cause of hypertension associated with resistant hypertension. Hypertension 2011;58:811–7. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.111.179788 315. Douma S, Petidis K, Doumas M, Papaefthimiou P, Triantafyllou A, Kartali N, et al. Prevalence of primary hyperaldosteronism in resistant hypertension: a retrospective observational study. Lancet 2008;371:1921–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(08)60834-x 316. Monticone S, Burrello J, Tizzani D, Bertello C, Viola A, Buffolo F, et al. Prevalence and clinical manifestations of primary aldosteronism encountered in primary care practice. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:1811–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.01.052 317. Käyser SC, Deinum J, de Grauw WJ, Schalk BWM, Bor HJHJ, Lenders JWM, et al. Prevalence of primary aldosteronism in primary care: a cross-sectional study. Br J Gen Pract 2018;68:e114–22. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X694589 318. Rimoldi SF, Scherrer U, Messerli FH. Secondary arterial hypertension: when, who, and how to screen? Eur Heart J 2014;35:1245–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/eht534 319. Rossi GP, Bisogni V, Rossitto G, Maiolino G, Cesari M, Zhu R, et al. Practice recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of the most common forms of secondary hypertension. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 2020;27:547–60. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s40292-020-00415-9 320. Calhoun DA, Nishizaka MK, Zaman MA, Thakkar RB, Weissmann P. Hyperaldosteronism among black and white subjects with resistant hypertension. Hypertension 2002;40:892–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.0000040261.30455.b6 321. Jaffe G, Gray Z, Krishnan G, Stedman M, Zheng Y, Han J, et al. Screening rates for primary aldosteronism in resistant hypertension: a cohort study. Hypertension 2020;75: 650–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.119.14359 322. Hundemer GL, Imsirovic H, Vaidya A, Yozamp N, Goupil R, Madore F, et al. Screening rates for primary aldosteronism among individuals with hypertension plus hypokalemia: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Hypertension 2022;79:178–86. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18118 323. Monticone S, D’Ascenzo F, Moretti C, Williams TA, Veglio F, Gaita F, et al. Cardiovascular events and target organ damage in primary aldosteronism compared with essential hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018;6:41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(17)30319-4 324. Savard S, Amar L, Plouin PF, Steichen O. Cardiovascular complications associated with primary aldosteronism: a controlled cross-sectional study. Hypertension 2013;62: 331–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.113.01060 325. Hiramatsu K, Yamada T, Yukimura Y, Komiya I, Ichikawa K, Ishihara M, et al. A screening test to identify aldosterone-producing adenoma by measuring plasma renin activity. Results in hypertensive patients. Arch Intern Med 1981;141:1589–93. https://doi.org/ 10.1001/archinte.1981.00340130033011 326. Rossi GP. Primary aldosteronism: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019; 74:2799–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.057 327. Rossi GP, Ceolotto G, Rossitto G, Maiolino G, Cesari M, Seccia TM. Effects of mineralocorticoid and AT1 receptor antagonism on the aldosterone-renin ratio in primary aldosteronism—the EMIRA study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2020;105:2060–7. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa080 328. Rossi GP, Bisogni V, Bacca AV, Bacca AV, Belfiore A, Cesari M, et al. The 2020 Italian Society of Arterial Hypertension (SIIA) practical guidelines for the management of primary aldosteronism. Int J Cardiol Hypertens 2020;5:100029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijchy.2020.100029 329. Faconti L, Kulkarni S, Delles C, Kapil V, Lewis P, Glover M, et al. Diagnosis and management of primary hyperaldosteronism in patients with hypertension: a practical approach endorsed by the British and Irish Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens 2024;38:8–18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-023-00875-1 330. Olin JW, Gornik HL, Bacharach JM, Biller J, Fine LJ, Gray BH, et al. Fibromuscular dysplasia: state of the science and critical unanswered questions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2014;129:1048–78. https://doi. org/10.1161/01.cir.0000442577.96802.8c 331. Faconti L, Morselli F, Sinha M, Chrysochou C, Chowienczyk PJ. Fibromuscular dysplasia and hypertension—a statement on behalf of the British and Irish Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens 2021;35:1051–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-020-00456-6 332. Gornik HL, Persu A, Adlam D, Aparicio LS, Azizi M, Boulanger M, et al. First international consensus on the diagnosis and management of fibromuscular dysplasia. J Hypertens 2019;37:229–52. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002019 333. Abrishami A, Khajehdehi A, Chung F. A systematic review of screening questionnaires for obstructive sleep apnea. Can J Anaesth 2010;57:423–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12630-010-9280-x 334. Chai-Coetzer CL, Antic NA, Hamilton GS, McArdle N, Wong K, Yee BJ, et al. Physician decision making and clinical outcomes with laboratory polysomnography or limitedchannel sleep studies for obstructive sleep apnea: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2017;166:332–40. https://doi.org/10.7326/m16-1301 335. Lenders JW, Eisenhofer G, Mannelli M, Pacak K. Phaeochromocytoma. Lancet 2005; 366:665–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)67139-5 336. Lenders JWM, Kerstens MN, Amar L, Prejbisz A, Robledo M, Taieb D, et al. Genetics, diagnosis, management and future directions of research of phaeochromocytoma and paraganglioma: a position statement and consensus of the Working Group on Endocrine Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens 2020;38:1443–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002438 337. Mannelli M, Ianni L, Cilotti A, Conti A. Pheochromocytoma in Italy: a multicentric retrospective study. Eur J Endocrinol 1999;141:619–24. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.0. 1410619 338. Neumann HPH, Young WF Jr, Eng C. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. N Engl J Med 2019;381:552–65. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1806651 339. Hundemer GL, Curhan GC, Yozamp N, Wang M, Vaidya A. Cardiometabolic outcomes and mortality in medically treated primary aldosteronism: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018;6:51–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213- 8587(17)30367-4 340. Jackson R, Lawes CM, Bennett DA, Milne RJ, Rodgers A. Treatment with drugs to lower blood pressure and blood cholesterol based on an individual’s absolute cardiovascular risk. Lancet 2005;365:434–41. 341. Yang L, Sun J, Zhao M, Liang Y, Bovet P, Xi B. Elevated blood pressure in childhood and hypertension risk in adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 2020;38:2346–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002550 342. Allen NB, Krefman AE, Labarthe D, Greenland P, Juonala M, Kähönen M, et al. Cardiovascular health trajectories from childhood through middle age and their association with subclinical atherosclerosis. JAMA Cardiol 2020;5:557–66. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jamacardio.2020.0140 343. de Simone G, Mancusi C, Hanssen H, Genovesi S, Lurbe E, Parati G, et al. Hypertension in children and adolescents. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3290–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehac328 344. Falkstedt D, Koupil I, Hemmingsson T. Blood pressure in late adolescence and early incidence of coronary heart disease and stroke in the Swedish 1969 conscription cohort. J Hypertens 2008;26:1313–20. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282ffb17e 345. Jacobs DR Jr, Woo JG, Sinaiko AR, Daniels SR, Ikonen J, Juonala M, et al. Childhood cardiovascular risk factors and adult cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2022;386: 1877–88. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2109191 346. Oikonen M, Nuotio J, Magnussen CG, Viikari JSA, Taittonen L, Laitinen T, et al. Repeated blood pressure measurements in childhood in prediction of hypertension in adulthood. Hypertension 2016;67:41–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 115.06395 347. Garcia-Lunar I, van der Ploeg HP, Fernández Alvira JM, van Nassau F, Castellano Vázquez JM, van der Beek AJ, et al. Effects of a comprehensive lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular health: the TANSNIP-PESA trial. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3732–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac378 348. Neal B, Wu Y, Feng X, Zhang R, Zhang Y, Shi J, et al. Effect of salt substitution on cardiovascular events and death. N Engl J Med 2021;385:1067–77. https://doi.org/10. 1056/NEJMoa2105675 349. He FJ, Tan M, Ma Y, MacGregor GA. Salt reduction to prevent hypertension and cardiovascular disease: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;75:632–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.055 350. Ma Y, He FJ, Sun Q, Yuan C, Kieneker LM, Curhan GC, et al. 24-Hour urinary sodium and potassium excretion and cardiovascular risk. N Engl J Med 2022;386:252–63. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2109794 351. Ma H, Xue Q, Wang X, Li X, Franco OH, Li Y, et al. Adding salt to foods and hazard of premature mortality. Eur Heart J 2022;43:2878–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehac208 352. Huang L, Trieu K, Yoshimura S, M Woodward, N Campbell, D Lackland, et al. Effect of dose and duration of reduction in dietary sodium on blood pressure levels: systematic Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.92
review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 2020;368:m315. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.m315 353. Graudal N, Hubeck-Graudal T, Jürgens G, Taylor RS. Dose-response relation between dietary sodium and blood pressure: a meta-regression analysis of 133 randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 2019;109:1273–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy384 354. Graudal NA, Hubeck-Graudal T, Jurgens G. Effects of low sodium diet versus high sodium diet on blood pressure, renin, aldosterone, catecholamines, cholesterol, and triglyceride. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;12:CD004022. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 14651858.CD004022.pub5 355. Filippini T, Malavolti M, Whelton PK, Naska A, Orsini N, Vinceti M. Blood pressure effects of sodium reduction: dose–response meta-analysis of experimental studies. Circulation 2021;143:1542–67. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.050371 356. Gupta DK, Lewis CE, Varady KA, Su YR, Madhur MS, Lackland DT, et al. Effect of dietary sodium on blood pressure: a crossover trial. JAMA 2023;330:2258 . https://doi.org/ 10.1001/jama.2023.23651 357. He J, Gu D, Chen J, Jaquish CE, Rao DC, Hixson JE, et al. Gender difference in blood pressure responses to dietary sodium intervention in the GenSalt study. J Hypertens 2009;27:48–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0b013e328316bb87 358. Sacks FM, Svetkey LP, Vollmer WM, Appel LJ, Bray GA, Harsha D, et al. Effects on blood pressure of reduced dietary sodium and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet. N Engl J Med 2001;344:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200101043440101 359. MacGregor GA, Markandu ND, Sagnella GA, Singer DR, Cappuccio FP. Double-blind study of three sodium intakes and long-term effects of sodium restriction in essential hypertension. Lancet 1989;2:1244–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(89)91852-7 360. Whelton PK, Appel LJ, Espeland MA, Applegate WB, Ettinger WH Jr, Kostis JB, et al. Sodium reduction and weight loss in the treatment of hypertension in older persons: a randomized controlled trial of nonpharmacologic interventions in the elderly (TONE). JAMA 1998;279:839–46. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.279.11.839 361. He FJ, Li J, Macgregor GA. Effect of longer term modest salt reduction on blood pressure: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 2013; 346:f1325. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1325 362. Stolarz-Skrzypek K, Kuznetsova T, Thijs L, Tikhonoff V, Seidlerová J, Richart T, et al. Fatal and nonfatal outcomes, incidence of hypertension, and blood pressure changes in relation to urinary sodium excretion. JAMA 2011;305:1777–85. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jama.2011.574 363. Messerli FH, Hofstetter L, Syrogiannouli L, Rexhaj E, Siontis GCM, Seiler C, et al. Sodium intake, life expectancy, and all-cause mortality. Eur Heart J 2021;42: 2103–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa947 364. Mente A, O’Donnell M, Rangarajan S, McQueen M, Dagenais G, Wielgosz A, et al. Urinary sodium excretion, blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and mortality: a community-level prospective epidemiological cohort study. Lancet 2018;392: 496–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31376-x 365. Au Yeung SL, Schooling CM. Impact of urinary sodium on cardiovascular disease and risk factors: a 2 sample Mendelian randomization study. Clin Nutr 2021;40:1990–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2020.09.018 366. Zanetti D, Bergman H, Burgess S, Assimes TL, Bhalla V, Ingelsson E. Urinary albumin, sodium, and potassium and cardiovascular outcomes in the UK Biobank: observational and Mendelian randomization analyses. Hypertension 2020;75:714–22. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/hypertensionaha.119.14028 367. Nolan P, McEvoy JW. Salt restriction for treatment of hypertension—current state and future directions. Curr Opin Cardiol 2024;39:61–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/hco. 0000000000001098 368. Yuan Y, Jin A, Neal B, Feng X, Qiao Q, Wang H, et al. Salt substitution and salt-supply restriction for lowering blood pressure in elderly care facilities: a cluster-randomized trial. Nat Med 2023;29:973–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02286-8 369. Lechner K, Schunkert H. Recommendations on sodium intake for cardiovascular health: conviction or evidence? Eur Heart J 2020;41:3374–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehaa545 370. O’Donnell M, Mente A, Alderman MH, Brady AJB, Diaz R, Gupta R, et al. Salt and cardiovascular disease: insufficient evidence to recommend low sodium intake. Eur Heart J 2020;41:3363–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa586 371. Aburto NJ, Hanson S, Gutierrez H, Hooper L, Elliott P, Cappuccio FP. Effect of increased potassium intake on cardiovascular risk factors and disease: systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ 2013;346:f1378. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1378 372. O’Donnell M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, McQueen MJ, Wang X, Liu L, et al. Urinary sodium and potassium excretion, mortality, and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2014; 371:612–23. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1311889 373. Wouda RD, Boekholdt SM, Khaw KT, Wareham NJ, de Borst MH, Hoorn EJ, et al. Sex-specific associations between potassium intake, blood pressure, and cardiovascular outcomes: the EPIC-Norfolk study. Eur Heart J 2022;43:2867–75. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac313 374. Filippini T, Naska A, Kasdagli MI, Torres D, Lopes C, Carvalho C, et al. Potassium intake and blood pressure: a dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Heart Assoc 2020;9:e015719. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.119.015719 375. O’Donnell M, Yusuf S, Vogt L, Mente A, Messerli FH. Potassium intake: the Cinderella electrolyte. Eur Heart J 2023;44:4925–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad628 376. Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI). K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines on hypertension and antihypertensive agents in chronic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;43:S1–290. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2004.03.006 377. Ndanuko RN, Ibrahim R, Hapsari RA, Neale EP, Raubenheimer D, Charlton KE. Association between the urinary sodium to potassium ratio and blood pressure in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Nutr 2021;12:1751–67. https://doi. org/10.1093/advances/nmab036 378. Messerli FH, O’Donnell M, Mente A, Yusuf S. Settling the controversy of salt substitutes and stroke: sodium reduction or potassium increase? Eur Heart J 2022;43: 3365–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac160 379. Yin X, Paige E, Tian M, Li Q, Huang L, Yu J, et al. The proportion of dietary salt replaced with potassium-enriched salt in the SSaSS: implications for scale-up. Hypertension 2023; 80:956–65. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.122.20115 380. Xu X, Zeng L, Jha V, Cobb LK, Shibuya K, Appel LJ, et al. Potassium-enriched salt substitutes: a review of recommendations in clinical management guidelines. Hypertension 2024;81:400–14. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21343 381. Hanssen H, Boardman H, Deiseroth A, Moholdt T, Simonenko M, Kränkel N, et al. Personalized exercise prescription in the prevention and treatment of arterial hypertension: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) and the ESC Council on Hypertension. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022; 29:205–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwaa141 382. Van Hoof R, Hespel P, Fagard R, Lijnen P, Staessen J, Amery A. Effect of endurance training on blood pressure at rest, during exercise and during 24 hours in sedentary men. Am J Cardiol 1989;63:945–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(89)90145-8 383. MacDonald HV, Johnson BT, Huedo-Medina TB, Livingston J, Forsyth KC, Kraemer WJ, et al. Dynamic resistance training as stand-alone antihypertensive lifestyle therapy: a meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e003231. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha. 116.003231 384. Hansford HJ, Parmenter BJ, McLeod KA, Wewege MA, Smart NA, Schutte AE, et al. The effectiveness and safety of isometric resistance training for adults with high blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertens Res 2021;44:1373–84. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-021-00720-3 385. Van Hoof R, Macor F, Lijnen P, Staessen J, Thijs L, Vanhees L, et al. Effect of strength training on blood pressure measured in various conditions in sedentary men. Int J Sports Med 1996;17:415–22. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-972871 386. Leal JM, Galliano LM, Del Vecchio FB. Effectiveness of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in hypertensive patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Hypertens Rep 2020;22:26. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11906-020-1030-z 387. Rossi A, Dikareva A, Bacon SL, Daskalopoulou SS. The impact of physical activity on mortality in patients with high blood pressure: a systematic review. J Hypertens 2012;30:1277–88. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283544669 388. Cuspidi C, Gherbesi E, Faggiano A, Sala C, Carugo S, Grassi G, et al. Masked hypertension and exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise: a review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023;13:1005. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13061005 389. Mariampillai JE, Liestøl K, Kjeldsen SE, Prestgaard EE, Engeseth K, Bodegard J, et al. Exercise systolic blood pressure at moderate workload is linearly associated with coronary disease risk in healthy men. Hypertension 2020;75:44–50. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.119.13528 390. Pelliccia A, Sharma S, Gati S, Bäck M, Börjesson M, Caselli S. 2020 ESC Guidelines on sports cardiology and exercise in patients with cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J 2021; 42:17–96. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa605 391. Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Buman MP, Cardon G, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med 2020;54:1451–62. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955 392. Saco-Ledo G, Valenzuela PL, Ramírez-Jiménez M, Morales JS, Castillo-García A, Blumenthal JA, et al. Acute aerobic exercise induces short-term reductions in ambulatory blood pressure in patients with hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 2021;78:1844–58. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 121.18099 393. Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee I-M, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011;43:1334–59. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb 394. Edwards JJ, Deenmamode AHP, Griffiths M, Arnold O, Cooper NJ, Wiles JD, et al. Exercise training and resting blood pressure: a large-scale pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Sports Med 2023;57:1317–26. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2022-106503 395. Fletcher GF, Ades PA, Kligfield P, Arena R, Balady GJ, Bittner VA, et al. Exercise standards for testing and training: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2013;128:873–934. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR. 0b013e31829b5b44 396. Craft BB, Carroll HA, Lustyk MK. Gender differences in exercise habits and quality of life reports: assessing the moderating effects of reasons for exercise. Int J Lib Arts Soc Sci 2014;2:65–76.
ESC Guidelines 4003
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.93
397. Mathieu P, Poirier P, Pibarot P, Lemieux I, Després JP. Visceral obesity: the link among inflammation, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease. Hypertension 2009;53:577–84. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.108.110320 398. Chandra A, Neeland IJ, Berry JD, Ayers CR, Rohatgi A, Das SR, et al. The relationship of body mass and fat distribution with incident hypertension: observations from the Dallas heart study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:997–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc. 2014.05.057 399. Neter JE, Stam BE, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM. Influence of weight reduction on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hypertension 2003;42: 878–84. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.Hyp.0000094221.86888.Ae 400. Haase CL, Lopes S, Olsen AH, Satylganova A, Schnecke V, McEwan P. Weight loss and risk reduction of obesity-related outcomes in 0.5 million people: evidence from a UK primary care database. Int J Obes (Lond) 2021;45:1249–58. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41366-021-00788-4 401. Moore LL, Visioni AJ, Qureshi MM, Bradlee ML, Ellison RC, D’Agostino R. Weight loss in overweight adults and the long-term risk of hypertension: the Framingham study. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:1298–303. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.165.11.1298 402. Zomer E, Gurusamy K, Leach R, Trimmer C, Lobstein T, Morris S, et al. Interventions that cause weight loss and the impact on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev 2016;17:1001–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12433 403. Wing RR, Espeland MA, Clark JM, Hazuda HP, Knowler WC, Pownall HJ, et al. Association of weight loss maintenance and weight regain on 4-year changes in CVD risk factors: the action for health in diabetes (Look AHEAD) clinical trial. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1345–55. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-0509 404. Ma C, Avenell A, Bolland M, Hudson J, Stewart F, Robertson C, et al. Effects of weight loss interventions for adults who are obese on mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2017;359:j4849. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.j4849 405. Semlitsch T, Krenn C, Jeitler K, Berghold A, Horvath K, Siebenhofer A. Long-term effects of weight-reducing diets in people with hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021;2:CD008274. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008274.pub4 406. Wing RR, Bolin P, Brancati FL, Bray GA, Clark JM, Coday M, et al. Cardiovascular effects of intensive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2013;369: 145–54. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1212914 407. Pagidipati NJ, Phelan M, Page C, Clowse M, Henao R, Peterson ED, et al. The importance of weight stabilization amongst those with overweight or obesity: results from a large health care system. Prev Med Rep 2021;24:101615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. pmedr.2021.101615 408. Estruch R, Ros E, Salas-Salvadó J, Covas M-I, Corella D, Arós F, et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet supplemented with extra-virgin olive oil or nuts. N Engl J Med 2018;378:e34. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1800389 409. Delgado-Lista J, Alcala-Diaz JF, Torres-Peña JD, Quintana-Navarro GM, Fuentes F, Garcia-Rios A, et al. Long-term secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet and a low-fat diet (CORDIOPREV): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2022;399:1876–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00122-2 410. Blumenthal JA, Babyak MA, Hinderliter A, Watkins LL, Craighead L, Lin P-H, et al. Effects of the DASH diet alone and in combination with exercise and weight loss on blood pressure and cardiovascular biomarkers in men and women with high blood pressure: the ENCORE study. Arch Intern Med 2010;170:126–35. https://doi.org/10. 1001/archinternmed.2009.470 411. Juraschek SP, Miller ER III, Weaver CM, Appel LJ. Effects of sodium reduction and the DASH diet in relation to baseline blood pressure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:2841–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.011 412. Gay HC, Rao SG, Vaccarino V, Ali MK. Effects of different dietary interventions on blood pressure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hypertension 2016;67:733–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.06853 413. Siebenhofer A, Winterholer S, Jeitler K, Horvath K, Berghold A, Krenn C, et al. Long-term effects of weight-reducing drugs in people with hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021;1:CD007654. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD007654.pub5 414. Müller TD, Blüher M, Tschöp MH, DiMarchi RD. Anti-obesity drug discovery: advances and challenges. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2022;21:201–23. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41573- 021-00337-8 415. Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Calanna S, Davies M, Van Gaal LF, Lingvay I, et al. Once-weekly semaglutide in adults with overweight or obesity. N Engl J Med 2021; 384:989–1002. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2032183 416. Davies M, Færch L, Jeppesen OK, Pakseresht A, Pedersen SD, Perreault L, et al. Semaglutide 2·4 mg once a week in adults with overweight or obesity, and type 2 diabetes (STEP 2): a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, placebocontrolled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2021;397:971–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0140-6736(21)00213-0 417. Tasnim S, Tang C, Musini VM, Wright JM. Effect of alcohol on blood pressure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;7:CD012787. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD012787.pub2 418. Liu F, Liu Y, Sun X, Yin Z, Li H, Deng K, et al. Race- and sex-specific association between alcohol consumption and hypertension in 22 cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2020;30:1249–59. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.numecd.2020.03.018 419. Griswold MG, Fullman N, Hawley C, Arian N, Zimsen SRM, Tymeson HD, et al. Alcohol use and burden for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet 2018;392:1015–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31310-2 420. D’Elia L, La Fata E, Galletti F, Scalfi L, Strazzullo P. Coffee consumption and risk of hypertension: a dose–response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J Nutr 2019;58:271–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-017-1591-z 421. Hodgson JM, Puddey IB, Woodman RJ, Mulder TPJ, Fuchs D, Scott K, et al. Effects of black tea on blood pressure: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2012;172: 186–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.172.2.186 422. Shah SA, Chu BW, Lacey CS, Riddock IC, Lee M, Dargush AE. Impact of acute energy drink consumption on blood pressure parameters: a meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother 2016;50:808–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060028016656433 423. Shah SA, Szeto AH, Farewell R, Shek A, Fan D, Quach KN, et al. Impact of high volume energy drink consumption on electrocardiographic and blood pressure parameters: a randomized trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2019;8:e011318. https://doi.org/10. 1161/jaha.118.011318 424. Basrai M, Schweinlin A, Menzel J, Mielke H, Weikert C, Dusemund B, et al. Energy drinks induce acute cardiovascular and metabolic changes pointing to potential risks for young adults: a randomized controlled trial. J Nutr 2019;149:441–50. https://doi. org/10.1093/jn/nxy303 425. Fung TT, Malik V, Rexrode KM, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sweetened beverage consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in women. Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89: 1037–42. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2008.27140 426. Mullee A, Romaguera D, Pearson-Stuttard J, Viallon V, Stepien M, Freisling H, et al. Association between soft drink consumption and mortality in 10 European countries. JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:1479–90. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed. 2019.2478 427. Farhangi MA, Nikniaz L, Khodarahmi M. Sugar-sweetened beverages increases the risk of hypertension among children and adolescence: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. J Transl Med 2020;18:344. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020- 02511-9 428. Critchley JA, Capewell S. Mortality risk reduction associated with smoking cessation in patients with coronary heart disease: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;290:86–97. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.290.1.86 429. Anthonisen NR, Skeans MA, Wise RA, Manfreda J, Kanner RE, Connett JE. The effects of a smoking cessation intervention on 14.5-year mortality: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 2005;142:233–9. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-142- 4-200502150-00005 430. Thomson B, Emberson J, Lacey B, Lewington S, Peto R, Jemal A. Association between smoking, smoking cessation, and mortality by race, ethnicity, and sex among US adults. JAMA Netw Open 2022;5:e2231480. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen. 2022.31480 431. Yang JJ, Yu D, Shu XO, Wen W, Rahman S, Abe S. Reduction in total and major causespecific mortality from tobacco smoking cessation: a pooled analysis of 16 populationbased cohort studies in Asia. Int J Epidemiol 2022;50:2070–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/ ije/dyab087 432. Martinez-Morata I, Sanchez TR, Shimbo D, Navas-Acien A. Electronic cigarette use and blood pressure endpoints: a systematic review. Curr Hypertens Rep 2020;23:2. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11906-020-01119-0 433. Kim SY, Jeong SH, Joo HJ, Park M, Park E-C, Kim JH, et al. High prevalence of hypertension among smokers of conventional and e-cigarette: using the nationally representative community dwelling survey. Front Public Health 2022;10:919585. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fpubh.2022.919585 434. Groppelli A, Giorgi DM, Omboni S, Parati G, Mancia G. Persistent blood pressure increase induced by heavy smoking. J Hypertens 1992;10:495–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/ 00004872-199205000-00014 435. Primatesta P, Falaschetti E, Gupta S, Marmot MG, Poulter NR. Association between smoking and blood pressure: evidence from the health survey for England. Hypertension 2001;37:187–93. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.37.2.187 436. Stead LF, Buitrago D, Preciado N, Sanchez G, Hartmann-Boyce J, Lancaster T. Physician advice for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;2013: CD000165. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000165.pub4 437. Rasmussen M, Lauridsen SV, Pedersen B, Backer V, Tønnesen H. Intensive versus short face-to-face smoking cessation interventions: a meta-analysis. Eur Respir Rev 2022;31: 220063. https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0063-2022 438. Filippou CD, Thomopoulos CG, Kouremeti MM, Sotiropoulou LI, Nihoyannopoulos PI, Tousoulis DM, et al. Mediterranean diet and blood pressure reduction in adults with and without hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 2021;40:3191–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2021.01.030 439. Cowell OR, Mistry N, Deighton K, Matu J, Griffiths A, Minihane AM, et al. Effects of a Mediterranean diet on blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. J Hypertens 2021;39:729–39. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002667 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.94
440. Roerecke M, Tobe SW, Kaczorowski J, Bacon SL, Vafaei A, Hasan OSM, et al. Sex-specific associations between alcohol consumption and incidence of hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7: e008202. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.117.008202 441. Ding C, O’Neill D, Bell S, Stamatakis E, Britton A. Association of alcohol consumption with morbidity and mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease: original data and meta-analysis of 48,423 men and women. BMC Med 2021;19:167. https://doi.org/10. 1186/s12916-021-02040-2 442. Marklund M, Singh G, Greer R, Cudhea F, Matsushita K, Micha R, et al. Estimated population wide benefits and risks in China of lowering sodium through potassium enriched salt substitution: modelling study. BMJ 2020;369:m824. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m824 443. Pinho-Gomes AC, Azevedo L, Copland E, Canoy D, Nazarzadeh M, Ramakrishnan R, et al. Blood pressure-lowering treatment for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation: an individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2021;18:e1003599. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003599 444. Bidel Z, Nazarzadeh M, Canoy D, Copland E, Gerdts E, Woodward M, et al. Sex-specific effects of blood pressure lowering pharmacotherapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Hypertension 2023;80:2293–302. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21496 445. Nazarzadeh M, Bidel Z, Canoy D, Copland E, Bennett DA, Dehghan A, et al. Blood pressure-lowering treatment for prevention of major cardiovascular diseases in people with and without type 2 diabetes: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2022;10:645–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(22) 00172-3 446. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood pressure lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: 4. Effects of various classes of antihypertensive drugs—overview and meta-analyses. J Hypertens 2015;33:195–211. https://doi.org/ 10.1097/hjh.0000000000000447 447. Ishani A, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM, Lew RA, Woods P, Glassman PA, et al. Chlorthalidone vs. hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension-cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2022;387:2401–10. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2212270 448. Ziff OJ, Samra M, Howard JP, Bromage DI, Ruschitzka F, Francis DP, et al. Beta-blocker efficacy across different cardiovascular indications: an umbrella review and meta-analytic assessment. BMC Med 2020;18:103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916- 020-01564-3 449. Thomopoulos C, Bazoukis G, Tsioufis C, Mancia G. Beta-blockers in hypertension: overview and meta-analysis of randomized outcome trials. J Hypertens 2020;38: 1669–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002523 450. Mancia G, Kjeldsen SE, Kreutz R, Pathak A, Grassi G, Esler M. Individualized betablocker treatment for high blood pressure dictated by medical comorbidities: indications beyond the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension Guidelines. Hypertension 2022;79:1153–66. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.122.19020 451. Bradley HA, Wiysonge CS, Volmink JA, Mayosi BM, Opie LH. How strong is the evidence for use of beta-blockers as first-line therapy for hypertension? Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 2006;24:2131–41. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh. 0000249685.58370.28 452. Wiysonge CS, Bradley HA, Volmink J, Mayosi BM, Opie LH. Beta-blockers for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;1:CD002003. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 14651858.CD002003.pub5 453. Elliott WJ, Meyer PM. Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis. Lancet 2007;369:201–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(07) 60108-1 454. Bangalore S, Parkar S, Grossman E, Messerli FH. A meta-analysis of 94,492 patients with hypertension treated with beta blockers to determine the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1254–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007. 05.057 455. Laurent S, Briet M, Boutouyrie P. Large and small artery cross-talk and recent morbidity-mortality trials in hypertension. Hypertension 2009;54:388–92. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.133116 456. Klingbeil AU, Schneider M, Martus P, Messerli FH, Schmieder RE. A meta-analysis of the effects of treatment on left ventricular mass in essential hypertension. Am J Med 2003;115:41–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00158-x 457. Zanchetti A, Bond MG, Hennig M, Neiss A, Mancia G, Dal Palù C, et al. Calcium antagonist lacidipine slows down progression of asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis: principal results of the European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis (ELSA), a randomized, double-blind, long-term trial. Circulation 2002;106:2422–7. https://doi. org/10.1161/01.cir.0000039288.86470.dd 458. Schiffrin EL, Deng LY. Comparison of effects of angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibition and beta-blockade for 2 years on function of small arteries from hypertensive patients. Hypertension 1995;25:699–703. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.25.4.699 459. Williams B, MacDonald TM, Morant S, Webb DJ, Sever P, McInnes G, et al. Spironolactone versus placebo, bisoprolol, and doxazosin to determine the optimal treatment for drug-resistant hypertension (PATHWAY-2): a randomised, doubleblind, crossover trial. Lancet 2015;386:2059–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(15)00257-3 460. Agarwal R, Filippatos G, Pitt B, Anker SD, Rossing P, Joseph A, et al. Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the FIDELITY pooled analysis. Eur Heart J 2022;43:474–84. https://doi.org/10. 1093/eurheartj/ehab777 461. Agarwal R, Ruilope LM, Ruiz-Hurtado G, Haller H, Schmieder RE, Anker SD, et al. Effect of finerenone on ambulatory blood pressure in chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes. J Hypertens 2023;41:295–302. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003330 462. Bakris GL, Agarwal R, Anker SD, Pitt B, Ruilope LM, Rossing P, et al. Effect of finerenone on chronic kidney disease outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2020;383: 2219–29. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2025845 463. The ALLHAT Officers Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients randomized to doxazosin vs chlorthalidone: the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2000;283:1967–75. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jama.283.15.1967 464. Ruilope LM, Dukat A, Böhm M, Lacourcière Y, Gong J, Lefkowitz MP. Blood-pressure reduction with LCZ696, a novel dual-acting inhibitor of the angiotensin II receptor and neprilysin: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active comparator study. Lancet 2010;375:1255–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61966-8 465. McMurray JJ, Packer M, Desai AS, Gong J, Lefkowitz MP, Rizkala AR, et al. Angiotensin– neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure. N Engl J Med 2014;371:993–1004. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1409077 466. Rakugi H, Kario K, Yamaguchi M, Sasajima T, Gotou H, Zhang J. Efficacy of sacubitril/ valsartan versus olmesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study. Hypertens Res 2022;45:824–33. https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41440-021-00819-7 467. Jackson AM, Jhund PS, Anand IS, Düngen H-D, Lam CSP, Lefkowitz MP, et al. Sacubitril-valsartan as a treatment for apparent resistant hypertension in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3741–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab499 468. Kario K, Sun N, Chiang FT, Supasyndh O, Baek SH, Inubushi-Molessa A, et al. Efficacy and safety of LCZ696, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, in Asian patients with hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Hypertension 2014;63:698–705. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.113.02002 469. Williams B, Cockcroft JR, Kario K, Zappe DH, Brunel PC, Wang Q, et al. Effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus olmesartan on central hemodynamics in the elderly with systolic hypertension: the PARAMETER study. Hypertension 2017;69:411–20. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.116.08556 470. Herrington WG, Savarese G, Haynes R, Marx N, Mellbin L, Lund LH, et al. Cardiac, renal, and metabolic effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors: a position paper from the European Society of Cardiology ad-hoc task force on sodiumglucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors. Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:1260–75. https://doi. org/10.1002/ejhf.2286 471. Gupta R, Maitz T, Egeler D, Mehta A, Nyaeme M, Hajra A, et al. SGLT2 inhibitors in hypertension: role beyond diabetes and heart failure. Trends Cardiovasc Med 2022; 33:479–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcm.2022.05.005 472. Kario K, Ferdinand KC, Vongpatanasin W. Are SGLT2 inhibitors new hypertension drugs? Circulation 2021;143:1750–3. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha. 121.053709 473. Yan C, Thijs L, Cao Y, Trenson S, Zhang Z-Y, Janssens S, et al. Opportunities of antidiabetic drugs in cardiovascular medicine: a meta-analysis and perspectives for trial design. Hypertension 2020;76:420–31. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 120.14791 474. Freeman MW, Halvorsen YD, Marshall W, Pater M, Isaacsohn J, Pearce C, et al. Phase 2 trial of baxdrostat for treatment-resistant hypertension. N Engl J Med 2023;388: 395–405. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2213169 475. Laffin LJ, Rodman D, Luther JM, Vaidya A, Weir MR, Rajicic N, et al. Aldosterone synthase inhibition with lorundrostat for uncontrolled hypertension: the target-HTN randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2023;330:1140–50. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023. 16029 476. Schlaich MP, Bellet M, Weber MA, Danaietash P, Bakris GL, Flack JM, et al. Dual endothelin antagonist aprocitentan for resistant hypertension (PRECISION): a multicentre, blinded, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2022;400:1927–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)02034-7 477. Desai AS, Webb DJ, Taubel J, Casey S, Cheng Y, Robbie GJ, et al. Zilebesiran, an RNA interference therapeutic agent for hypertension. N Engl J Med 2023;389:228–38. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2208391 478. Law MR, Wald NJ, Morris JK, Jordan RE. Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials. BMJ 2003; 326:1427. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1427 479. Mahmud A, Feely J. Low-dose quadruple antihypertensive combination: more efficacious than individual agents—a preliminary report. Hypertension 2007;49:272–5. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000254479.66645.a3 480. Wald DS, Law M, Morris JK, Bestwick JP, Wald NJ. Combination therapy versus monotherapy in reducing blood pressure: meta-analysis on 11,000 participants from 42 trials. Am J Med 2009;122:290–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.09.038
ESC Guidelines 4005
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.95
481. Chow CK, Thakkar J, Bennett A, Hillis G, Burke M, Usherwood T, et al. Quarter-dose quadruple combination therapy for initial treatment of hypertension: placebocontrolled, crossover, randomised trial and systematic review. Lancet 2017;389: 1035–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30260-x 482. Chow CK, Atkins ER, Hillis GS, Nelson MR, Reid CM, Schlaich MP, et al. Initial treatment with a single pill containing quadruple combination of quarter doses of blood pressure medicines versus standard dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension (QUARTET): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial. Lancet 2021; 398:1043–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01922-x 483. Webster R, Salam A, de Silva HA, Selak V, Stepien S, Rajapakse S, et al. Fixed low-dose triple combination antihypertensive medication vs usual care for blood pressure control in patients with mild to moderate hypertension in Sri Lanka: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2018;320:566–79. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.10359 484. MacDonald TM, Williams B, Webb DJ, Morant S, Caulfield M, Cruickshank JK, et al. Combination therapy is superior to sequential monotherapy for the initial treatment of hypertension: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6: e006986. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.117.006986 485. Salam A, Kanukula R, Atkins E, Wang X, Islam S, Kishore SP, et al. Efficacy and safety of dual combination therapy of blood pressure-lowering drugs as initial treatment for hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hypertens 2019;37:1768–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002096 486. Zhang ZY, Yu YL, Asayama K, Hansen TW, Maestre GE, Staessen JA. Starting antihypertensive drug treatment with combination therapy: controversies in hypertension— con side of the argument. Hypertension 2021;77:788–98. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.120.12858 487. Kahan T. Low-dose combination of blood pressure-lowering medicines. Lancet 2021; 398:1022–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01964-4 488. Rea F, Corrao G, Merlino L, Mancia G. Initial antihypertensive treatment strategies and therapeutic inertia. Hypertension 2018;72:846–53. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.118.11308 489. Egan BM, Bandyopadhyay D, Shaftman SR, Wagner CS, Zhao Y, Yu-Isenberg KS. Initial monotherapy and combination therapy and hypertension control the first year. Hypertension 2012;59:1124–31. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.112.194167 490. Sundström J, Lind L, Nowrouzi S, Hagström E, Held C, Lytsy P, et al. Heterogeneity in blood pressure response to 4 antihypertensive drugs: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2023;329:1160–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.3322 491. Tsioufis K, Kreutz R, Sykara G, van Vugt J, Hassan T. Impact of single-pill combination therapy on adherence, blood pressure control, and clinical outcomes: a rapid evidence assessment of recent literature. J Hypertens 2020;38:1016–28. https://doi.org/10.1097/ hjh.0000000000002381 492. Parati G, Kjeldsen S, Coca A, Cushman WC, Wang J. Adherence to single-pill versus freeequivalent combination therapy in hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 2021;77:692–705. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15781 493. Egan BM, Kjeldsen SE, Narkiewicz K, Kreutz R, Burnier M. Single-pill combinations, hypertension control and clinical outcomes: potential, pitfalls and solutions. Blood Press 2022;31:164–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/08037051.2022.2095254 494. Yusuf S, Joseph P, Dans A, Gao P, Teo K, Xavier D, et al. Polypill with or without aspirin in persons without cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 2021;384:216–28. https://doi. org/10.1056/NEJMoa2028220 495. Roshandel G, Khoshnia M, Poustchi H, Hemming K, Kamangar F, Gharavi A, et al. Effectiveness of polypill for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (PolyIran): a pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2019;394:672–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31791-x 496. Joseph P, Roshandel G, Gao P, Pais P, Lonn E, Xavier D, et al. Fixed-dose combination therapies with and without aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021;398:1133–46. https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0140-6736(21)01827-4 497. van Vark LC, Bertrand M, Akkerhuis KM, Brugts JJ, Fox K, Mourad J-J, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors reduce mortality in hypertension: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors involving 158 998 patients. Eur Heart J 2012;33:2088–97. https://doi.org/10. 1093/eurheartj/ehs075 498. Parving HH, Brenner BM, McMurray JJ, de Zeeuw D, Haffner SM, Solomon SD, et al. Cardiorenal end points in a trial of aliskiren for type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2012;367: 2204–13. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1208799 499. Fried LF, Emanuele N, Zhang JH, Brophy M, Conner TA, Duckworth W, et al. Combined angiotensin inhibition for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1892–903. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1303154 500. Yusuf S, Teo KK, Pogue J, Dyal L, Copland I, Schumacher H, et al. Telmisartan, ramipril, or both in patients at high risk for vascular events. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1547–59. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0801317 501. Gupta AK, Arshad S, Poulter NR. Compliance, safety, and effectiveness of fixed-dose combinations of antihypertensive agents: a meta-analysis. Hypertension 2010;55: 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.139816 502. Gnanenthiran SR, Wang N, Di Tanna GL, Salam A, Webster R, de Silva HA, et al. Association of low-dose triple combination therapy vs usual care with time at target blood pressure: a secondary analysis of the TRIUMPH randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol 2022;7:645–50. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2022.0471 503. Tam TS, Wu MH, Masson SC, Tsang MP, Stabler SN, Kinkade A, et al. Eplerenone for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;2:CD008996. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 14651858.CD008996.pub2 504. Pedersen ME, Cockcroft JR. The vasodilatory beta-blockers. Curr Hypertens Rep 2007; 9:269–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-007-0050-2 505. Sica DA. Minoxidil: an underused vasodilator for resistant or severe hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2004;6:283–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-6175.2004.03585.x 506. Muñoz D, Uzoije P, Reynolds C, Miller R, Walkley D, Pappalardo S, et al. Polypill for cardiovascular disease prevention in an underserved population. N Engl J Med 2019; 381:1114–23. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1815359 507. Castellano JM, Pocock SJ, Bhatt DL, Quesada AJ, Owen R, Fernandez-Ortiz A, et al. Polypill strategy in secondary cardiovascular prevention. N Engl J Med 2022;387: 967–77. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2208275 508. González-Juanatey JR, Cordero A, Castellano JM, Masana L, Dalmau R, Ruiz E, et al. The CNIC-polypill reduces recurrent major cardiovascular events in real-life secondary prevention patients in Spain: the NEPTUNO study. Int J Cardiol 2022;361:116–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.05.015 509. Jowett S, Barton P, Roalfe A, Fletcher K, Hobbs FDR, McManus RJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of use of a polypill versus usual care or best practice for primary prevention in people at high risk of cardiovascular disease. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0182625. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182625 510. McManus RJ, Mant J, Bray EP, Holder R, Jones MI, Greenfield S, et al. Telemonitoring and self-management in the control of hypertension (TASMINH2): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010;376:163–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60964-6 511. Clark CE, Smith LF, Taylor RS, Campbell JL. Nurse led interventions to improve control of blood pressure in people with hypertension: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2010;341:c3995. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c3995 512. Mackenzie IS, Rogers A, Poulter NR, Williams B, Brown MJ, Webb DJ, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension with evening versus morning dosing of usual antihypertensives in the UK (TIME study): a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint clinical trial. Lancet 2022;400:1417–25. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01786-x 513. Conn VS, Ruppar TM, Chase JA, Enriquez M, Cooper PS. Interventions to improve medication adherence in hypertensive patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Hypertens Rep 2015;17:94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-015-0606-5 514. Corrao G, Parodi A, Zambon A, Heiman F, Filippi A, Cricelli C, et al. Reduced discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment by two-drug combination as first step. Evidence from daily life practice. J Hypertens 2010;28:1584–90. https://doi.org/10. 1097/HJH.0b013e328339f9fa 515. Krieger EM, Drager LF, Giorgi DMA, Pereira AC, Barreto-Filho JAS, Nogueira AR, et al. Spironolactone versus clonidine as a fourth-drug therapy for resistant hypertension: the ReHOT randomized study (resistant hypertension optimal treatment). Hypertension 2018;71:681–90. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10662 516. Williams B, MacDonald TM, Morant SV, Webb DJ, Sever P, McInnes GT, et al. Endocrine and haemodynamic changes in resistant hypertension, and blood pressure responses to spironolactone or amiloride: the PATHWAY-2 mechanisms substudies. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018;6:464–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(18) 30071-8 517. Mann JF, Schmieder RE, McQueen M, Dyal L, Schumacher H, Pogue J, et al. Renal outcomes with telmisartan, ramipril, or both, in people at high vascular risk (the ONTARGET study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372:547–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61236-2 518. Jones DW, Whelton PK, Allen N, Clark D III, Gidding SS, Muntner P, et al. Management of stage 1 hypertension in adults with a low 10-year risk for cardiovascular disease: filling a guidance gap: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2021;77:e58–67. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp.0000000000000195 519. Ali DH, Kiliç B, Hart HE, Bots ML, Biermans MCJ, Spiering W, et al. Therapeutic inertia in the management of hypertension in primary care. J Hypertens 2021;39:1238–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002783 520. Appel LJ, Champagne CM, Harsha DW, Cooper LS, Obarzanek E, Elmer PJ, et al. Effects of comprehensive lifestyle modification on blood pressure control: main results of the PREMIER clinical trial. JAMA 2003;289:2083–93. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama. 289.16.2083 521. Appel LJ, Sacks FM, Carey VJ, Obarzanek E, Swain JF, Miller ER, et al. Effects of protein, monounsaturated fat, and carbohydrate intake on blood pressure and serum lipids: results of the OmniHeart randomized trial. JAMA 2005;294:2455–64. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jama.294.19.2455 522. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on outcome incidence. 12. Effects in individuals with high-normal and normal blood pressure: overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2017;35: 2150–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000001547 523. Williamson JD, Supiano MA, Applegate WB, Berlowitz DR, Campbell RC, Chertow GM, et al. Intensive vs standard blood pressure control and cardiovascular disease Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.96
outcomes in adults aged ≥75 years: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2016;315: 2673–82. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.7050 524. Beckett N, Peters R, Leonetti G, Duggan J, Fagard R, Thijs L, et al. Subgroup and perprotocol analyses from the hypertension in the very elderly trial. J Hypertens 2014;32: 1478–87; discussion 1487. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000195 525. Jowett S, Kodabuckus S, Ford GA, Hobbs FDR, Lown M, Mant J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive deprescribing in primary care: a Markov modelling study using data from the OPTiMISE trial. Hypertension 2022;79:1122–31. https:// doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18726 526. Odden MC, McClure LA, Sawaya BP, White CL, Peralta CA, Field TS, et al. Achieved blood pressure and outcomes in the secondary prevention of small subcortical strokes trial. Hypertension 2016;67:63–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 115.06480 527. Chen T, Shao F, Chen K, Wang Y, Wu Z, Wang Y, et al. Time to clinical benefit of intensive blood pressure lowering in patients 60 years and older with hypertension: a secondary analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Intern Med 2022;182:660–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.1657 528. Neaton JD, Grimm RH Jr, Prineas RJ, Stamler J, Grandits GA, Elmer PJ, et al. Treatment of mild hypertension study. Final results. Treatment of mild hypertension study research group. JAMA 1993;270:713–24. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama. 1993.03510060059034 529. Wu J, Kraja AT, Oberman A, Lewis C, Ellison R, Arnett D, et al. A summary of the effects of antihypertensive medications on measured blood pressure. Am J Hypertens 2005;18:935–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.01.011 530. Canoy D, Copland E, Nazarzadeh M, Ramakrishnan R, Pinho-Gomes A-C, Salam A, et al. Antihypertensive drug effects on long-term blood pressure: an individual-level data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Heart 2022;108:1281–9. https://doi. org/10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320171 531. Paz MA, de-La-Sierra A, Sáez M, Barceló MA, Rodríguez JJ, Castro S, et al. Treatment efficacy of anti-hypertensive drugs in monotherapy or combination: ATOM systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials according to PRISMA statement. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e4071. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000004071 532. Morales-Salinas A, Kones R. Concerning the degradation of β-blocker use in the 2018 ESC/ESH hypertension guidelines. Eur Heart J 2019;40:2091. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehz125 533. Lindholm LH, Carlberg B, Samuelsson O. Should beta blockers remain first choice in the treatment of primary hypertension? A meta-analysis. Lancet 2005;366:1545–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)67573-3 534. Larochelle P, Tobe SW, Lacourcière Y. β-Blockers in hypertension: studies and meta-analyses over the years. Can J Cardiol 2014;30:S16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cjca.2014.02.012 535. Reboussin DM, Allen NB, Griswold ME, Guallar E, Hong Y, Lackland DT, et al. Systematic review for the 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. Hypertension 2018;71:e116–35. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp.0000000000000067 536. Wright JM, Musini VM, Gill R. First-line drugs for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;4:CD001841. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001841.pub3 537. Johnston GD. Dose-response relationships with antihypertensive drugs. Pharmacol Ther 1992;55:53–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/0163-7258(92)90029-y 538. Law MR, Morris JK, Wald NJ. Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies. BMJ 2009;338:b1665. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.b1665 539. Messerli FH, Bangalore S, Schmieder RE. Wilder’s principle: pre-treatment value determines post-treatment response. Eur Heart J 2015;36:576–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehu467 540. Lasserson DS, Buclin T, Glasziou P. How quickly should we titrate antihypertensive medication? Systematic review modelling blood pressure response from trial data. Heart 2011;97:1771–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2010.221473 541. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood pressure lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension. 1. Overview, meta-analyses, and meta-regression analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2014;32:2285–95. https://doi.org/10.1097/ hjh.0000000000000378 542. Verdecchia P, Staessen JA, Angeli F, de Simone G, Achilli A, Ganau A, et al. Usual versus tight control of systolic blood pressure in non-diabetic patients with hypertension (Cardio-Sis): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet 2009;374:525–33. https://doi. org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61340-4 543. Benavente OR, Coffey CS, Conwit R, Hart RG, McClure LA, Pearce LA, et al. Blood-pressure targets in patients with recent lacunar stroke: the SPS3 randomised trial. Lancet 2013;382:507–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60852-1 544. Vaduganathan M, Claggett BL, Juraschek SP, Solomon SD. Assessment of long-term benefit of intensive blood pressure control on residual life span: secondary analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). JAMA Cardiol 2020;5: 576–81. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2019.6192 545. Lewis CE, Fine LJ, Beddhu S, Cheung AK, Cushman WC, Cutler JA, et al. Final report of a trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med 2021;384: 1921–30. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1901281 546. Beddhu S, Chertow GM, Cheung AK, Cushman WC, Rahman M, Greene T, et al. Influence of baseline diastolic blood pressure on effects of intensive compared with standard blood pressure control. Circulation 2018;137:134–43. https://doi.org/10. 1161/circulationaha.117.030848 547. McEvoy JW, Daya N, Rahman F, Hoogeveen RC, Blumenthal RS, Shah AM, et al. Association of isolated diastolic hypertension as defined by the 2017 ACC/AHA blood pressure guideline with incident cardiovascular outcomes. JAMA 2020;323:329–38. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.21402 548. Jacobsen AP, Al Rifai M, Arps K, Whelton SP, Budoff MJ, Nasir K, et al. A cohort study and meta-analysis of isolated diastolic hypertension: searching for a threshold to guide treatment. Eur Heart J 2021;42:2119–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab111 549. McEvoy JW, Yang WY, Thijs L, Zhang Z-Y, Melgarejo JD, Boggia J, et al. Isolated diastolic hypertension in the IDACO study: an age-stratified analysis using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements. Hypertension 2021;78:1222–31. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.17766 550. Albasri A, Hattle M, Koshiaris C, Dunnigan A, Paxton B, Fox SE, et al. Association between antihypertensive treatment and adverse events: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2021;372:n189. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n189 551. Savoia C, Volpe M, Grassi G, Borghi C, Agabiti Rosei E, Touyz RM, et al. Personalized medicine-a modern approach for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Clin Sci (Lond) 2017;131:2671–85. https://doi.org/10.1042/cs20160407 552. Egan BM, Basile JN, Rehman SU, Davis PB, Grob CH 3rd, Riehle JF, et al. Plasma renin test–guided drug treatment algorithm for correcting patients with treated but uncontrolled hypertension: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Hypertens 2009;22:792–801. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajh.2009.63 553. Huang KY, Tseng PT, Wu YC, Tu Y-K, Stubbs B, Su K-P, et al. Do beta-adrenergic blocking agents increase asthma exacerbation? A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sci Rep 2021;11:452. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-79837-3 554. Bennett M, Chang CL, Tatley M, Savage R, Hancox RJ. The safety of cardioselective β1-blockers in asthma: literature review and search of global pharmacovigilance safety reports. ERJ Open Res 2021;7:00801-2020. https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00801-2020 555. Assimes TL, Elstein E, Langleben A, Suissa S. Long-term use of antihypertensive drugs and risk of cancer. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2008;17:1039–49. https://doi.org/10. 1002/pds.1656 556. Zhang Y, Song M, Chan AT, Meyerhardt JA, Willett WC, Giovannucci EL. Long-term use of antihypertensive medications, hypertension and colorectal cancer risk and mortality: a prospective cohort study. Br J Cancer 2022;127:1974–82. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41416-022-01975-4 557. Grossman E, Messerli FH. Long-term safety of antihypertensive therapy. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2006;49:16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2006.06.002 558. Parati G, Stergiou GS, Dolan E, Bilo G. Blood pressure variability: clinical relevance and application. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2018;20:1133–7. https://doi.org/10. 1111/jch.13304 559. Schutte AE, Kollias A, Stergiou GS. Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques. Nat Rev Cardiol 2022;19:643–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41569-022-00690-0 560. Lauder L, Azizi M, Kirtane AJ, Böhm M, Mahfoud F. Device-based therapies for arterial hypertension. Nat Rev Cardiol 2020;17:614–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41569-020-0364-1 561. Mahfoud F, Schlaich MP, Lobo MD. Device therapy of hypertension. Circ Res 2021;128: 1080–99. https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.121.318091 562. DiBona GF. Sympathetic nervous system and hypertension. Hypertension 2013;61: 556–60. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.00633 563. DiBona GF, Esler M. Translational medicine: the antihypertensive effect of renal denervation. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2010;298:R245–253. https://doi.org/ 10.1152/ajpregu.00647.2009 564. Böhm M, Kario K, Kandzari DE, Mahfoud F, Weber MA, Schmieder RE, et al. Efficacy of catheter-based renal denervation in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet 2020;395:1444–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30554-7 565. Weber MA, Kirtane AJ, Weir MR, Radhakrishnan J, Das T, Berk M, et al. The REDUCE HTN: REINFORCE: randomized, sham-controlled trial of bipolar radiofrequency renal denervation for the treatment of hypertension. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2020;13: 461–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.10.061 566. Kandzari DE, Böhm M, Mahfoud F, Townsend RR, Weber MA, Pocock S, et al. Effect of renal denervation on blood pressure in the presence of antihypertensive drugs: 6-month efficacy and safety results from the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED proof-of-concept randomised trial. Lancet 2018;391:2346–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18) 30951-6 567. Azizi M, Schmieder RE, Mahfoud F, Weber MA, Daemen J, Davies J, et al. Endovascular ultrasound renal denervation to treat hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN SOLO): a multicentre, international, single-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet 2018; 391:2335–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31082-1
ESC Guidelines 4007
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.97
568. Azizi M, Sanghvi K, Saxena M, Gosse P, Reilly JP, Levy T, et al. Ultrasound renal denervation for hypertension resistant to a triple medication pill (RADIANCE-HTN TRIO): a randomised, multicentre, single-blind, sham-controlled trial. Lancet 2021;397: 2476–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00788-1 569. Mahfoud F, Böhm M, Schmieder R, Narkiewicz K, Ewen S, Ruilope L, et al. Effects of renal denervation on kidney function and long-term outcomes: 3-year follow-up from the global SYMPLICITY registry. Eur Heart J 2019;40:3474–82. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz118 570. Bhatt DL, Vaduganathan M, Kandzari DE, Leon MB, Rocha-Singh K, Townsend RR, et al. Long-term outcomes after catheter-based renal artery denervation for resistant hypertension: final follow-up of the randomised SYMPLICITY HTN-3 trial. Lancet 2022;400:1405–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01787-1 571. Mahfoud F, Kandzari DE, Kario K, Townsend RR, Weber MA, Schmieder RE, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of renal denervation in the presence of antihypertensive drugs (SPYRAL HTN-ON MED): a randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet 2022; 399:1401–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00455-x 572. Rader F, Kirtane AJ, Wang Y, Daemen J, Lurz P, Sayer J, et al. Durability of blood pressure reduction after ultrasound renal denervation: three-year follow-up of the treatment arm of the randomised RADIANCE-HTN SOLO trial. EuroIntervention 2022;18: e677–85. https://doi.org/10.4244/eij-d-22-00305 573. Al Ghorani H, Kulenthiran S, Recktenwald MJM, Lauder L, Kunz M, Götzinger F, et al. 10-year outcomes of catheter-based renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;81:517–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.11.038 574. Stone P, Campbell J, Thompson S, Walker J. A prospective, randomized study comparing ultrasound versus fluoroscopic guided femoral arterial access in noncardiac vascular patients. J Vasc Surg 2020;72:259–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2019.09.051 575. Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, Niemelä K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2011;377: 1409–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60404-2 576. Townsend RR, Walton A, Hettrick DA, Hickey GL, Weil J, Sharp ASP, et al. Review and meta-analysis of renal artery damage following percutaneous renal denervation with radiofrequency renal artery ablation. EuroIntervention 2020;16:89–96. https://doi.org/ 10.4244/eij-d-19-00902 577. Sanders MF, Reitsma JB, Morpey M, Gremmels H, Bots ML, Pisano A, et al. Renal safety of catheter-based renal denervation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2017;32:1440–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfx088 578. Ahmad Y, Francis DP, Bhatt DL, Howard JP. Renal denervation for hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2021;14:2614–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2021.09.020 579. Chowdhury EK, Reid CM, Zomer E, Kelly DJ, Liew D. Cost-effectiveness of renal denervation therapy for treatment-resistant hypertension: a best case scenario. Am J Hypertens 2018;31:1156–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpy108 580. Sharp ASP, Cao KN, Esler MD, Kandzari DE, Lobo MD, Schmieder RE, et al. Cost-effectiveness of catheter-based radiofrequency renal denervation for the treatment of uncontrolled hypertension: an analysis for the UK based on recent clinical evidence. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2024:qcae001. https://doi.org/10.1093/ ehjqcco/qcae001 581. Fengler K, Reimann P, Rommel KP, Kresoja K-P, Blazek S, Unterhuber M, et al. Comparison of long-term outcomes for responders versus non-responders following renal denervation in resistant hypertension. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e022429. https:// doi.org/10.1161/jaha.121.022429 582. Mahfoud F, Mancia G, Schmieder RE, Ruilope L, Narkiewicz K, Schlaich M, et al. Cardiovascular risk reduction after renal denervation according to time in therapeutic systolic blood pressure range. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;80:1871–80. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jacc.2022.08.802 583. Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, Barbato E, Berry C, Chieffo A, et al. ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3720–826. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad191 584. Singh RR, Denton KM. Renal denervation. Hypertension 2018;72:528–36. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.118.10265 585. Barbato E, Azizi M, Schmieder RE, Lauder L, Böhm M, Brouwers S, et al. Renal denervation in the management of hypertension in adults. A clinical consensus statement of the ESC Council on Hypertension and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 2023;44:1313–30. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad054 586. Bhatt DL, Kandzari DE, O’Neill WW, D’Agostino R, Flack JM, Katzen BT, et al. A controlled trial of renal denervation for resistant hypertension. N Engl J Med 2014;370: 1393–401. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1402670 587. Desch S, Okon T, Heinemann D, Kulle K, Röhnert K, Sonnabend M, et al. Randomized sham-controlled trial of renal sympathetic denervation in mild resistant hypertension. Hypertension 2015;65:1202–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.05283 588. Mathiassen ON, Vase H, Bech JN, Christensen KL, Buus NH, Schroeder AP, et al. Renal denervation in treatment-resistant essential hypertension. A randomized, SHAM-controlled, double-blinded 24–h blood pressure-based trial. J Hypertens 2016;34:1639–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000977 589. Townsend RR, Mahfoud F, Kandzari DE, Kario K, Pocock S, Weber MA, et al. Catheter-based renal denervation in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED): a randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-concept trial. Lancet 2017;390:2160–70. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32281-x 590. Kario K, Yokoi Y, Okamura K, Fujihara M, Ogoyama Y, Yamamoto E, et al. Catheter-based ultrasound renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension: the randomized, controlled REQUIRE trial. Hypertens Res 2022;45:221–31. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41440-021-00754-7 591. Neuzil P, Merkely B, Erglis A, Marinskis G, de Groot JR, Schmidinger H, et al. Pacemaker-mediated programmable hypertension control therapy. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e006974. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.117.006974 592. Kalarus Z, Merkely B, Neužil P, Grabowski M, Mitkowski P, Marinskis G, et al. Pacemaker-based cardiac neuromodulation therapy in patients with hypertension: a pilot study. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e020492. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.120. 020492 593. Musini VM, Tejani AM, Bassett K, Puil L, Wright JM. Pharmacotherapy for hypertension in adults 60 years or older. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;6:CD000028. https://doi. org/10.1002/14651858.CD000028.pub3 594. Musini VM, Gueyffier F, Puil L, Salzwedel DM, Wright JM. Pharmacotherapy for hypertension in adults aged 18 to 59 years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;8:CD008276. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008276.pub2 595. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment in hypertension: 9. Discontinuations for adverse events attributed to different classes of antihypertensive drugs: meta-analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2016;34: 1921–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000001052 596. Benetos A, Petrovic M, Strandberg T. Hypertension management in older and frail older patients. Circ Res 2019;124:1045–60. https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.118.313236 597. Frey L, Gravestock I, Pichierri G, Steurer J, Burgstaller JM. Serious adverse events in patients with target-oriented blood pressure management: a systematic review. J Hypertens 2019;37:2135–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002176 598. Palmer SC, Sciancalepore M, Strippoli GF. Trial quality in nephrology: how are we measuring up? Am J Kidney Dis 2011;58:335–7. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2011. 06.006 599. Carriazo S, Sarafidis P, Ferro CJ, Ortiz A. Blood pressure targets in CKD 2021: the never-ending guidelines debacle. Clin Kidney J 2022;15:845–51. https://doi.org/10. 1093/ckj/sfac014 600. Kessler A, Sollie S, Challacombe B, Briggs K, Van Hemelrijck M. The global prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a review. BJU Int 2019;124:587–99. https://doi.org/10. 1111/bju.14813 601. Doumas M, Douma S. The effect of antihypertensive drugs on erectile function: a proposed management algorithm. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2006;8:359–64. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.05285.x 602. Ismail SB, Noor NM, Hussain NHN, Sulaiman Z, Shamsudin MA, Irfan M. Angiotensin receptor blockers for erectile dysfunction in hypertensive men: a brief meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Am J Mens Health 2019;13:1557988319892735. https://doi. org/10.1177/1557988319892735 603. Lawson AJ, Hameed MA, Brown R, Cappuccio FP, George S, Hinton T, et al. Nonadherence to antihypertensive medications is related to pill burden in apparent treatment-resistant hypertensive individuals. J Hypertens 2020;38:1165–73. https:// doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002398 604. Choudhry NK, Kronish IM, Vongpatanasin W, Ferdinand KC, Pavlik VN, Egan BM, et al. Medication adherence and blood pressure control: a scientific statement from the American heart association. Hypertension 2022;79:e1–14. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hyp.0000000000000203 605. Liao CT, Toh HS, Sun L, Yang C-T, Hu A, Wei D, et al. Cost-effectiveness of intensive vs standard blood pressure control among older patients with hypertension. JAMA Netw Open 2023;6:e230708. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.0708 606. O’Donoghue P, O’Halloran AM, Kenny RA, Romero-Ortuno R. Do the frail experience more adverse events from intensive blood pressure control? A 2-year prospective study in the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA). EClinicalMedicine 2022;45: 101304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101304 607. Sexton DJ, Canney M, O’Connell MDL, Moore P, Little MA, O’Seaghdha CM, et al. Injurious falls and syncope in older community-dwelling adults meeting inclusion criteria for SPRINT. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:1385–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamainternmed.2017.2924 608. Masoli JAH, Sheppard JP, Rajkumar C. Hypertension management in older patients-are the guideline blood pressure targets appropriate? Age Ageing 2022;51:afab226. https:// doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afab226 609. Richter D, Guasti L, Walker D, Lambrinou E, Lionis C, Abreu A, et al. Frailty in cardiology: definition, assessment and clinical implications for general cardiology. A consensus document of the Council for Cardiology Practice (CCP), Association for Acute Cardio Vascular Care (ACVC), Association of Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions (ACNAP), European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Council on Valvular Heart Diseases (VHD), Council on Hypertension (CHT), Council of Cardio-Oncology (CCO), Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.98
Working Group (WG) Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases, WG e-Cardiology, WG Thrombosis, of the European Society of Cardiology, European Primary Care Cardiology Society (EPCCS). Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29:216–27. https://doi.org/10. 1093/eurjpc/zwaa167 610. Hughes D, Judge C, Murphy R, Loughlin E, Costello M, Whiteley W, et al. Association of blood pressure lowering with incident dementia or cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2020;323:1934–44. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama. 2020.4249 611. Peters R, Xu Y, Fitzgerald O, Aung HL, Beckett N, Bulpitt C, et al. Blood pressure lowering and prevention of dementia: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2022;43:4980–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac584 612. Pathak A, Poulter NR, Kavanagh M, Kreutz R, Burnier M. Improving the management of hypertension by tackling awareness, adherence, and clinical inertia: a symposium report. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2022;22:251–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40256-021- 00505-6 613. Sheppard JP, Lown M, Burt J, Temple E, Lowe R, Ashby H, et al. Generalizability of blood pressure lowering trials to older patients: cross-sectional analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc 2020;68:2508–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.16749 614. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood pressure lowering treatment in hypertension: 8. Outcome reductions vs. discontinuations because of adverse drug events—meta-analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2016;34:1451–63. https://doi. org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000972 615. Jordan J, Tank J, Reuter H. Risk-benefit assessment of intense blood pressure lowering. Hypertension 2019;74:1302–4. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.119.13835 616. Rietz H, Pennlert J, Nordström P, Brunström M. Prevalence, time-trends and clinical characteristics of hypertension in young adults: nationwide cross-sectional study of 1.7 million Swedish 18-year-olds, 1969–2010. J Hypertens 2022;40:1231–8. https:// doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003141 617. Ostchega Y, Fryar CD, Nwankwo T, Nguyen DT. Hypertension prevalence among adults aged 18 and over: United States, 2017–2018. NCHS Data Brief 2020;364:1–8. 618. O’Neil A, Scovelle AJ, Milner AJ, Kavanagh A. Gender/sex as a social determinant of cardiovascular risk. Circulation 2018;137:854–64. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.117.028595 619. Bruno RM, Pucci G, Rosticci M, Guarino L, Guglielmo C, Agabiti Rosei C, et al. Association between lifestyle and systemic arterial hypertension in young adults: a national, survey-based, cross-sectional study. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 2016;23: 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-016-0135-6 620. Suzuki Y, Kaneko H, Yano Y, Okada A, Itoh H, Matsuoka S, et al. Association of cardiovascular health metrics with risk of transition to hypertension in non-hypertensive young adults. Am J Hypertens 2022;35:858–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpac057 621. Haggart RC, Bartels CM, Smith MA, Johnson HM. Sociodemographics and hypertension control among young adults with incident hypertension: a multidisciplinary group practice observational study. J Hypertens 2018;36:2425–33. https://doi.org/10.1097/ hjh.0000000000001872 622. Liu J, Bu X, Wei L, Wang X, Lai L, Dong C, et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases attributable to hypertension in young adults from 1990 to 2019. J Hypertens 2021;39:2488–96. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002958 623. Zhang Y, Moran AE. Trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension among young adults in the United States, 1999 to 2014. Hypertension 2017;70:736–42. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.09801 624. Yano Y, Stamler J, Garside DB, Daviglus ML, Franklin SS, Carnethon MR, et al. Isolated systolic hypertension in young and middle-aged adults and 31-year risk for cardiovascular mortality: the Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;65:327–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.10.060 625. Noilhan C, Barigou M, Bieler L, Amar J, Chamontin B, Bouhanick B, et al. Causes of secondary hypertension in the young population: a monocentric study. Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris) 2016;65:159–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancard.2016.04.016 626. Jones ESW, Esack I, Mangena P, Rayner BL. Hypertension in adolescents and young adults referred to a tertiary hypertension clinic in Cape Town, South Africa. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020;99:e23137. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000023137 627. Chasan-Taber L, Willett WC, Manson JE, Spiegelman D, Hunter DJ, Curhan G, et al. Prospective study of oral contraceptives and hypertension among women in the United States. Circulation 1996;94:483–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.94.3.483 628. Lubianca JN, Faccin CS, Fuchs FD. Oral contraceptives: a risk factor for uncontrolled blood pressure among hypertensive women. Contraception 2003;67:19–24. https://doi. org/10.1016/s0010-7824(02)00429-8 629. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin No. 206: use of hormonal contraception in women with coexisting medical conditions. Obstet Gynecol 2019;133:e128–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003072 630. Glisic M, Shahzad S, Tsoli S, Chadni M, Asllanaj E, Rojas LZ, et al. Association between progestin-only contraceptive use and cardiometabolic outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2018;25:1042–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2047487318774847 631. Archer DF, Ahrendt HJ, Drouin D. Drospirenone-only oral contraceptive: results from a multicenter noncomparative trial of efficacy, safety and tolerability. Contraception 2015;92:439–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2015.07.014 632. Pappaccogli M, Di Monaco S, Warchoł-Celińska E, Lorthioir A, Amar L, Aparicio LS, et al. The European/International Fibromuscular Dysplasia Registry and Initiative (FEIRI)—clinical phenotypes and their predictors based on a cohort of 1000 patients. Cardiovasc Res 2021;117:950–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvaa102 633. Thompson P, Logan I, Tomson C, Sheerin N, Ellam T. Obesity, sex, race, and early onset hypertension: implications for a refined investigation strategy. Hypertension 2020; 76:859–65. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15557 634. Saladini F, Fania C, Mos L, Mazzer A, Casiglia E, Palatini P. Office pulse pressure is a predictor of favorable outcome in young- to middle-aged subjects with stage 1 hypertension. Hypertension 2017;70:537–42. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117. 09516 635. Hoeltzenbein M, Tissen-Diabaté T, Fietz AK, Zinke S, Kayser A, Meister R, et al. Increased rate of birth defects after first trimester use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors—treatment or hypertension related? An observational cohort study. Pregnancy Hypertens 2018;13:65–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2018.04.022 636. Ahmed B, Tran DT, Zoega H, Kennedy SE, Jorm LR, Havard A. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with the use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers for chronic hypertension in early pregnancy. Pregnancy Hypertens 2018;14:156–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2018.09.010 637. Cífková R, Johnson MR, Kahan T, Brguljan J, Williams B, Coca A, et al. Peripartum management of hypertension: a position paper of the ESC Council on Hypertension and the European Society of Hypertension. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2020;6: 384–93. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvz082 638. Magee LA, Brown MA, Hall DR, Gupte S, Hennessy A, Karumanchi SA, et al. The 2021 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice. Pregnancy Hypertens 2022;27:148–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2021.09.008 639. Kassebaum NJ, Barber RM, Bhutta ZA, Dandona L, Gething PW, Hay SI, et al. Global, regional, and national levels of maternal mortality, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. The Lancet 2016;388:1775–812. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31470-2 640. Garovic VD, White WM, Vaughan L, Saiki M, Parashuram S, Garcia-Valencia O, et al. Incidence and long-term outcomes of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;75:2323–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.03.028 641. Heida KY, Franx A, van Rijn BB, Eijkemans MJC, Boer JMA, Verschuren MWM, et al. Earlier age of onset of chronic hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus after a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy or gestational diabetes mellitus. Hypertension 2015;66: 1116–22. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.06005 642. Garovic VD, Bailey KR, Boerwinkle E, Hunt SC, Weder AB, Curb D, et al. Hypertension in pregnancy as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease later in life. J Hypertens 2010;28:826–33. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e328335c29a 643. Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, Karumanchi SA, McCarthy FP, Saito S, et al. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis, and management recommendations for international practice. Hypertension 2018;72:24–43. https://doi. org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10803 644. Homer CS, Brown MA, Mangos G, Davis GK. Non-proteinuric pre-eclampsia: a novel risk indicator in women with gestational hypertension. J Hypertens 2008;26:295–302. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282f1a953 645. Davis GK, Roberts LM, Mangos GJ, Brown MA. Comparisons of auscultatory hybrid and automated sphygmomanometers with mercury sphygmomanometry in hypertensive and normotensive pregnant women: parallel validation studies. J Hypertens 2015; 33:499–505; discussion 505–496. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000420 646. Schmella MJ, Clifton RG, Althouse AD, Roberts JM. Uric acid determination in gestational hypertension: is it as effective a delineator of risk as proteinuria in high-risk women? Reprod Sci 2015;22:1212–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719115572477 647. Rolnik DL, Wright D, Poon LC, O’Gorman N, Syngelaki A, de Paco Matallana C, et al. Aspirin versus placebo in pregnancies at high risk for preterm preeclampsia. N Engl J Med 2017;377:613–22. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1704559 648. Chappell LC, Shennan AH. Assessment of proteinuria in pregnancy. BMJ 2008;336: 968–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39540.657928.BE 649. Jeon HR, Jeong DH, Lee JY, Woo EY, Shin GT, Kim S-Y. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio as a predictive and prognostic marker for preeclampsia. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2021;47:2318–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.14815 650. Bateman BT, Bansil P, Hernandez-Diaz S, Mhyre JM, Callaghan WM, Kuklina EV. Prevalence, trends, and outcomes of chronic hypertension: a nationwide sample of delivery admissions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:134.e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ajog.2011.10.878 651. Zhou J, Azizan EAB, Cabrera CP, Fernandes-Rosa FL, Boulkroun S, Argentesi G, et al. Somatic mutations of GNA11 and GNAQ in CTNNB1-mutant aldosteroneproducing adenomas presenting in puberty, pregnancy or menopause. Nat Genet 2021;53:1360–72. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-021-00906-y 652. Lenders JWM, Langton K, Langenhuijsen JF, Eisenhofer G. Pheochromocytoma and pregnancy. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2019;48:605–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ecl.2019.05.006 653. Bancos I, Atkinson E, Eng C, Young WF Jr, Neumann HPH, Yukina M, et al. Maternal and fetal outcomes in phaeochromocytoma and pregnancy: a multicentre retrospective
ESC Guidelines 4009
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.99
cohort study and systematic review of literature. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2021;9: 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(20)30363-6 654. Martínez-Vizcaíno V, Sanabria-Martínez G, Fernández-Rodríguez R, Cavero-Redondo I, Pascual-Morena C, Álvarez-Bueno C, et al. Exercise during pregnancy for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus and hypertensive disorders: an umbrella review of randomised controlled trials and an updated meta-analysis. Bjog 2023;130:264–75. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17304 655. Mottola MF, Davenport MH, Ruchat SM, Davies GA, Poitras VJ, Gray CE, et al. 2019 Canadian guideline for physical activity throughout pregnancy. Br J Sports Med 2018;52: 1339–46. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-100056 656. Askie LM, Duley L, Henderson-Smart DJ, Stewart LA. Antiplatelet agents for prevention of pre-eclampsia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 2007;369: 1791–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60712-0 657. Duley L, Meher S, Hunter KE, Seidler AL, Askie LM. Antiplatelet agents for preventing pre-eclampsia and its complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;2019: CD004659. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004659.pub3 658. Hofmeyr GJ, Lawrie TA, Atallah ÁN, Torloni MR. Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for preventing hypertensive disorders and related problems. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;10:CD001059. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001059.pub5 659. Dwarkanath P, Muhihi A, Sudfeld CR, Wylie BJ, Wang M, Perumal N, et al. Two randomized trials of low-dose calcium supplementation in pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2024; 390:143–53. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2307212 660. Abalos E, Duley L, Steyn DW, Gialdini C. Antihypertensive drug therapy for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;10: CD002252. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002252.pub4 661. Magee LA, von Dadelszen P, Rey E, Ross S, Asztalos E, Murphy KE, et al. Less-tight versus tight control of hypertension in pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2015;372:407–17. https:// doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1404595 662. Redman CW. Fetal outcome in trial of antihypertensive treatment in pregnancy. Lancet 1976;2:753–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(76)90597-3 663. Cockburn J, Moar VA, Ounsted M, Redman CW. Final report of study on hypertension during pregnancy: the effects of specific treatment on the growth and development of the children. Lancet 1982;1:647–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(82)92202-4 664. Bellos I, Pergialiotis V, Papapanagiotou A, Loutradis D, Daskalakis G. Comparative efficacy and safety of oral antihypertensive agents in pregnant women with chronic hypertension: a network metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020;223:525–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.016 665. Lydakis C, Lip GY, Beevers M, Beevers DG. Atenolol and fetal growth in pregnancies complicated by hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1999;12:541–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0895-7061(99)00031-x 666. Sridharan K, Sequeira RP. Drugs for treating severe hypertension in pregnancy: a network meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2018;84:1906–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.13649 667. Bhat AD, Keasler PM, Kolluru L, Dombrowski MM, Palanisamy A, Singh PM, et al. Treatment of acute-onset hypertension in pregnancy: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing anti-hypertensives and route of administration. Pregnancy Hypertens 2023;34:74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2023.10.005 668. Ehikioya E, Okobi OE, Beeko MAE, Abanga R, Abah NNI, Briggs L, et al. Comparing intravenous labetalol and intravenous hydralazine for managing severe gestational hypertension. Cureus 2023;15:e42332. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.42332 669. Halpern DG, Weinberg CR, Pinnelas R, Mehta-Lee S, Economy KE, Valente AM, et al. Use of medication for cardiovascular disease during pregnancy: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:457–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.075 670. Goel A, Maski MR, Bajracharya S, Wenger JB, Zhang D, Salahuddin S, et al. Epidemiology and mechanisms of de novo and persistent hypertension in the postpartum period. Circulation 2015;132:1726–33. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha. 115.015721 671. Behrens I, Basit S, Melbye M, Lykke JA, Wohlfahrt J, Bundgaard H, et al. Risk of postpregnancy hypertension in women with a history of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2017;358:j3078. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.j3078 672. Barrett PM, McCarthy FP, Evans M, Kublickas M, Perry IJ, Stenvinkel P, et al. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and the risk of chronic kidney disease: a Swedish registry-based cohort study. PLoS Med 2020;17:e1003255. https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003255 673. Giorgione V, Ridder A, Kalafat E, Khalil A, Thilaganathan B. Incidence of postpartum hypertension within 2 years of a pregnancy complicated by pre-eclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2021;128:495–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471- 0528.16545 674. Benschop L, Duvekot JJ, Versmissen J, van Broekhoven V, Steegers EAP, Roeters van Lennep JE, et al. Blood pressure profile 1 year after severe preeclampsia. Hypertension 2018;71:491–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10338 675. Kitt J, Fox R, Frost A, Shanyinde M, Tucker K, Bateman PA, et al. Long-term blood pressure control after hypertensive pregnancy following physician-optimized selfmanagement: the POP-HT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2023;330:1991–9. https:// doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.21523 676. van Oostwaard MF, Langenveld J, Schuit E, Papatsonis DNM, Brown MA, Byaruhanga RN, et al. Recurrence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: an individual patient data metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;212:624.e1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog. 2015.01.009 677. Brown MA, Mackenzie C, Dunsmuir W, Roberts L, Ikin K, Matthews J, et al. Can we predict recurrence of pre-eclampsia or gestational hypertension? BJOG 2007;114: 984–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01376.x 678. Heimberger S, Perdigao JL, Mueller A, Shahul S, Naseem H, Minhas R, et al. Effect of blood pressure control in early pregnancy and clinical outcomes in African American women with chronic hypertension. Pregnancy Hypertens 2020;20:102–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2020.03.008 679. Salazar MR, Espeche WG, Balbín E, Leiva Sisnieguez CE, Leiva Sisnieguez BC, Stavile RN, et al. Office blood pressure values and the necessity of out-of-office measurements in high-risk pregnancies. J Hypertens 2019;37:1838–44. https://doi.org/10. 1097/hjh.0000000000002140 680. Buawangpong N, Teekachunhatean S, Koonrungsesomboon N. Adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with first-trimester exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pharmacol Res Perspect 2020;8:e00644. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.644 681. Weber-Schoendorfer C, Kayser A, Tissen-Diabaté T, Winterfeld U, Eleftheriou G, Te Winkel B, et al. Fetotoxic risk of AT1 blockers exceeds that of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: an observational study. J Hypertens 2020;38:133–41. https://doi.org/ 10.1097/hjh.0000000000002233 682. Chen X, Mao G, Leng SX. Frailty syndrome: an overview. Clin Interv Aging 2014;9: 433–41. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.S45300 683. Rodriguez-Mañas L, Fried LP. Frailty in the clinical scenario. Lancet 2015;385:e7–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61595-6 684. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56:M146–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146 685. Fried LP, Kronmal RA, Newman AB, Bild DE, Mittelmark MB, Polak JF, et al. Risk factors for 5-year mortality in older adults: the cardiovascular health study. JAMA 1998;279: 585–92. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.279.8.585 686. Martens DS, Thijs L, Latosinska A, Trenson S, Siwy J, Zhang Z-Y, et al. Urinary peptidomic profiles to address age-related disabilities: a prospective population study. Lancet Healthy Longev 2021;2:e690–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2666-7568(21) 00226-9 687. Monahan KD. Effect of aging on baroreflex function in humans. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2007;293:R3–r12. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00031.2007 688. Paleczny B, Niewiński P, Rydlewska A, Piepoli MF, Borodulin-Nadzieja L, Jankowska EA, et al. Age-related reflex responses from peripheral and central chemoreceptors in healthy men. Clin Auton Res 2014;24:285–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10286- 014-0263-9 689. Anker D, Santos-Eggimann B, Zwahlen M, Santschi V, Rodondi N, Wolfson C, et al. Blood pressure in relation to frailty in older adults: a population-based study. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2019;21:1895–904. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13722 690. Ravindrarajah R, Hazra NC, Hamada S, Charlton J, Jackson SHD, Dregan A, et al. Systolic blood pressure trajectory, frailty, and all-cause mortality >80 years of age: cohort study using electronic health records. Circulation 2017;135:2357–68. https://doi. org/10.1161/circulationaha.116.026687 691. Searle SD, Mitnitski A, Gahbauer EA, Gill TM, Rockwood K. A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr 2008;8:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471- 2318-8-24 692. Clegg A, Bates C, Young J, Ryan R, Nichols L, Ann Teale E, et al. Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data. Age Ageing 2016;45:353–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw039 693. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, Bergman H, Hogan DB, McDowell I, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ 2005;173:489–95. https:// doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.050051 694. Nguyen TN, Harris K, Woodward M, Chalmers J, Cooper M, Hamet P, et al. The impact of frailty on the effectiveness and safety of intensive glucose control and blood pressure-lowering therapy for people with type 2 diabetes: results from the ADVANCE trial. Diabetes Care 2021;44:1622–9. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-2664 695. Masoli JAH, Delgado J, Pilling L, Strain D, Melzer D. Blood pressure in frail older adults: associations with cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality. Age Ageing 2020;49: 807–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaa028 696. Aparicio LS, Thijs L, Boggia J, Jacobs L, Barochiner J, Odili AN, et al. Defining thresholds for home blood pressure monitoring in octogenarians. Hypertension 2015;66:865–73. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.05800 697. Gaffney B, Jacobsen AP, Pallippattu AW, Leahy N, McEvoy JW. The diastolic blood pressure J-curve in hypertension management: links and risk for cardiovascular disease. Integr Blood Press Control 2021;14:179–87. https://doi.org/10.2147/ibpc.S286957 698. Warwick J, Falaschetti E, Rockwood K, Mitnitski A, Thijs L, Beckett N, et al. No evidence that frailty modifies the positive impact of antihypertensive treatment in very elderly people: an investigation of the impact of frailty upon treatment effect in the HYpertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET) study, a double-blind, Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.100
placebo-controlled study of antihypertensives in people with hypertension aged 80 and over. BMC Med 2015;13:78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0328-1 699. Todd OM, Wilkinson C, Hale M, Wong NL, Hall M, Sheppard JP, et al. Is the association between blood pressure and mortality in older adults different with frailty? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 2019;48:627–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ ageing/afz072 700. Li Y, Thijs L, Zhang ZY, Asayama K, Hansen TW, Boggia J, et al. Opposing age-related trends in absolute and relative risk of adverse health outcomes associated with out-of-office blood pressure. Hypertension 2019;74:1333–42. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.119.12958 701. Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE, Staessen JA, Liu L, Dumitrascu D, et al. Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1887–98. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0801369 702. Peters R, Beckett N, McCormack T, Fagard R, Fletcher A, Bulpitt C. Treating hypertension in the very elderly-benefits, risks, and future directions, a focus on the hypertension in the very elderly trial. Eur Heart J 2014;35:1712–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/eht464 703. Travers J, Romero-Ortuno R, Bailey J, Cooney MT. Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions. Br J Gen Pract 2019;69:e61–9. https://doi. org/10.3399/bjgp18X700241 704. Bogaerts JMK, von Ballmoos LM, Achterberg WP, Gussekloo J, Streit S, van der Ploeg MA, et al. Do we AGREE on the targets of antihypertensive drug treatment in older adults: a systematic review of guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Age Ageing 2022;51:afab192. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afab192 705. Sheppard JP, Benetos A, McManus RJ. Antihypertensive deprescribing in older adults: a practical guide. Curr Hypertens Rep 2022;24:571–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906- 022-01215-3 706. McDonnell CC, Rogers KC, Regen SM, Finks SW. The Fall Risk with Alpha blockers Given InitiaL dose or Elderly status (FRAGILE) study. Ann Pharmacother 2020;54: 226–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060028019880305 707. Hiremath S, Ruzicka M, Petrcich W, McCallum MK, Hundemer GL, Tanuseputro P, et al. Alpha-blocker use and the risk of hypotension and hypotension-related clinical events in women of advanced age. Hypertension 2019;74:645–51. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.119.13289 708. Li H, Xu TY, Li Y, Chia Y-C, Buranakitjaroen P, Cheng H-M, et al. Role of α1-blockers in the current management of hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2022;24: 1180–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.14556 709. Ravindrarajah R, Dregan A, Hazra NC, Hamada S, Jackson SHD, Gulliford MC, et al. Declining blood pressure and intensification of blood pressure management among people over 80 years: cohort study using electronic health records. J Hypertens 2017;35:1276–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000001291 710. Chun S, Han K, Lee S, Cho M-H, Jeong S-M, Jung H-W, et al. Impact of frailty on the relationship between blood pressure and cardiovascular diseases and mortality in young-old adults. J Pers Med 2022;12:418. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030418 711. Khan N, McAlister FA. Re-examining the efficacy of beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis. CMAJ 2006;174:1737–42. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj. 060110 712. Lavan AH, Gallagher P, Parsons C, O’Mahony D. STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy): consensus validation. Age Ageing 2017;46:600–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afx005 713. Eeftinck Schattenkerk DW, van Gorp J, Vogt L, Peters RJ, van den Born BH. Isolated systolic hypertension of the young and its association with central blood pressure in a large multi-ethnic population. The HELIUS study. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2018;25: 1351–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487318777430 714. Franklin SS, Jacobs MJ, Wong ND, L’Italien GJ, Lapuerta P. Predominance of isolated systolic hypertension among middle-aged and elderly US hypertensives: analysis based on National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III. Hypertension 2001;37:869–74. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.37.3.869 715. Van Bortel LM, Laurent S, Boutouyrie P, Chowienczyk P, Cruickshank JK, De Backer T, et al. Expert consensus document on the measurement of aortic stiffness in daily practice using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. J Hypertens 2012;30:445–8. https://doi. org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e32834fa8b0 716. The Reference Values for Arterial Stiffness Collaboration. Determinants of pulse wave velocity in healthy people and in the presence of cardiovascular risk factors: ‘establishing normal and reference values’. Eur Heart J 2010;31:2338–50. https://doi.org/10. 1093/eurheartj/ehq165 717. Li Y, Wei FF, Thijs L, Boggia J, Asayama K, Hansen TW, et al. Ambulatory hypertension subtypes and 24-hour systolic and diastolic blood pressure as distinct outcome predictors in 8341 untreated people recruited from 12 populations. Circulation 2014;130: 466–74. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.113.004876 718. Staessen JA, Gasowski J, Wang JG, Thijs L, Hond ED, Boissel J-P, et al. Risks of untreated and treated isolated systolic hypertension in the elderly: meta-analysis of outcome trials. Lancet 2000;355:865–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(99)07330-4 719. McEniery CM, Yasmin, Wallace S, Maki-Petaja K, McDonnell B, Sharman JE, et al. Increased stroke volume and aortic stiffness contribute to isolated systolic hypertension in young adults. Hypertension 2005;46:221–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP. 0000165310.84801.e0 720. Palatini P, Rosei EA, Avolio A, Bilo G, Casiglia E, Ghiadoni L, et al. Isolated systolic hypertension in the young: a position paper endorsed by the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens 2018;36:1222–36. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh. 0000000000001726 721. Unger T, Borghi C, Charchar F, Khan NA, Poulter NR, Prabhakaran D, et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension global hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 2020;75:1334–57. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15026 722. Yano Y, Chang Kim H, Lee H, Azahar N, Ahmed S, Kitaoka K, et al. Response to isolated diastolic hypertension and risk of cardiovascular disease: controversies in hypertension—con side of the argument. Hypertension 2022;79:1579. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hypertensionaha.122.19493 723. Jacobsen AP, McKittrick M, Daya N, Al Rifai M, McEvoy JW. Isolated diastolic hypertension and risk of cardiovascular disease: controversies in hypertension— con side of the argument. Hypertension 2022;79:1571–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.122.18458 724. Blank SG, Mann SJ, James GD, West JE, Pickering TG. Isolated elevation of diastolic blood pressure. Real or artifactual? Hypertension 1995;26:383–9. https://doi.org/10. 1161/01.hyp.26.3.383 725. Cho SMJ, Lee H, Koyama S, Zou RS, Schuermans A, Ganesh S, et al. Cumulative diastolic blood pressure burden in normal systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular disease. Hypertension 2024;81:273–81. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 123.22160 726. Grobman B, Turkson-Ocran RN, Staessen JA, Yu Y-L, Lipsitz LA, Mukamal KJ, et al. Body position and orthostatic hypotension in hypertensive adults: results from the Syst-Eur trial. Hypertension 2023;80:820–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 122.20602 727. Juraschek SP, Taylor AA, Wright JT Jr, Evans GW, Miller ER, Plante TB, et al. Orthostatic hypotension, cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events: results from SPRINT. Hypertension 2020;75:660–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 119.14309 728. Juraschek SP, Daya N, Appel LJ, Miller ER, McEvoy JW, Matsushita K, et al. Orthostatic hypotension and risk of clinical and subclinical cardiovascular disease in middle-aged adults. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7:e008884. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.118.008884 729. Fleg JL, Evans GW, Margolis KL, Barzilay J, Basile JN, Bigger JT, et al. Orthostatic hypotension in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) blood pressure trial: prevalence, incidence, and prognostic significance. Hypertension 2016; 68:888–95. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.116.07474 730. Juraschek SP, Hu JR, Cluett JL, Ishak A, Mita C, Lipsitz LA, et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure treatment on orthostatic hypotension : a systematic review and individual participant-based meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2021;174:58–68. https://doi. org/10.7326/m20-4298 731. Ylitalo A, Airaksinen KE, Sellin L, Huikuri HV. Effects of combination antihypertensive therapy on baroreflex sensitivity and heart rate variability in systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1999;83:885–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(98)01067-4 732. Ganjehei L, Massumi A, Razavi M, Wilson JM. Orthostatic hypotension as a manifestation of vitamin B12 deficiency. Tex Heart Inst J 2012;39:722–3. 733. Shimbo D, Barrett Bowling C, Levitan EB, Deng L, Sim JJ, Huang L, et al. Short-term risk of serious fall injuries in older adults initiating and intensifying treatment with antihypertensive medication. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2016;9:222–9. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/circoutcomes.115.002524 734. Krediet CT, van Lieshout JJ, Bogert LW, Immink RV, Kim Y-S, Wieling W, et al. Leg crossing improves orthostatic tolerance in healthy subjects: a placebo-controlled crossover study. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2006;291:H1768–72. https://doi.org/ 10.1152/ajpheart.00287.2006 735. Okamoto LE, Diedrich A, Baudenbacher FJ, Harder R, Whitfield JS, Iqbal F, et al. Efficacy of servo-controlled splanchnic venous compression in the treatment of orthostatic hypotension: a randomized comparison with midodrine. Hypertension 2016;68: 418–26. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.116.07199 736. Okamoto LE, Celedonio JE, Smith EC, Gamboa A, Shibao CA, Diedrich A, et al. Local passive heat for the treatment of hypertension in autonomic failure. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e018979. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.120.018979 737. Buyken AE, von Eckardstein A, Schulte H, Cullen P, Assmann G. Type 2 diabetes mellitus and risk of coronary heart disease: results of the 10-year follow-up of the PROCAM study. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2007;14:230–6. https://doi.org/10. 1097/HJR.0b013e3280142037 738. Nathan DM. Long-term complications of diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1993;328: 1676–85. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199306103282306 739. Marx N, Federici M, Schütt K, Müller-Wieland D, Ajjan RA, Antunes MJ, et al. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. Eur Heart J 2023;44:4043–140. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad192 740. Pylypchuk R, Wells S, Kerr A, Poppe K, Harwood M, Mehta S, et al. Cardiovascular risk prediction in type 2 diabetes before and after widespread screening: a derivation and validation study. Lancet 2021;397:2264–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21) 00572-9 741. Danaei G, Fahimi S, Lu Y, Zhou B, Hajifathalian K, Di Cesare M, et al. Effects of diabetes definition on global surveillance of diabetes prevalence and diagnosis: a pooled analysis
ESC Guidelines 4011
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.101
of 96 population-based studies with 331288 participants. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015;3:624–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00129-1 742. Wright AK, Suarez-Ortegon MF, Read SH, Kontopantelis E, Buchan I, Emsley R, et al. Risk factor control and cardiovascular event risk in people with type 2 diabetes in primary and secondary prevention settings. Circulation 2020;142:1925–36. https://doi. org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.046783 743. Adamsson Eryd S, Gudbjörnsdottir S, Manhem K, Rosengren A, Svensson A-M, Miftaraj M, et al. Blood pressure and complications in individuals with type 2 diabetes and no previous cardiovascular disease: national population based cohort study. BMJ 2016;354:i4070. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4070 744. Brunström M, Carlberg B. Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels in patients with diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ 2016;352:i717. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i717 745. Emdin CA, Rahimi K, Neal B, Callender T, Perkovic V, Patel A. Blood pressure lowering in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2015;313:603–15. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.18574 746. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A. Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on outcome incidence in hypertension: 10 – Should blood pressure management differ in hypertensive patients with and without diabetes mellitus? Overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2017;35:922–44. https://doi.org/10. 1097/hjh.0000000000001276 747. Rahman F, McEvoy JW, Ohkuma T, Marre M, Hamet P, Harrap S, et al. Effects of blood pressure lowering on clinical outcomes according to baseline blood pressure and cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Hypertension 2019;73:1291–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.118.12414 748. Agashe S, Petak S. Cardiac autonomic neuropathy in diabetes mellitus. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J 2018;14:251–6. https://doi.org/10.14797/mdcj-14-4-251 749. Beddhu S, Chertow GM, Greene T, Whelton PK, Ambrosius WT, Cheung AK, et al. Effects of intensive systolic blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on standard glycemic control and in those without diabetes mellitus: reconciling results from ACCORD BP and SPRINT. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7:e009326. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.118.009326 750. Buckley LF, Dixon DL, Wohlford GF, Wijesinghe DS, Baker WL, Van Tassell BW. Intensive versus standard blood pressure control in SPRINT-eligible participants of ACCORD-BP. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1733–8. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-1366 751. Brouwer TF, Vehmeijer JT, Kalkman DN, Berger WR, van den Born B-JH, Peters RJ, et al. Intensive blood pressure lowering in patients with and patients without type 2 diabetes: a pooled analysis from two randomized trials. Diabetes Care 2018;41: 1142–8. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-1722 752. Shi S, Gouskova N, Najafzadeh M, Wei LJ, Kim DH. Intensive versus standard blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes: a restricted mean survival time analysis of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2021;11:e050335. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmjopen-2021-050335 753. Palmer SC, Mavridis D, Navarese E, Craig JC, Tonelli M, Salanti G, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of blood pressure-lowering agents in adults with diabetes and kidney disease: a network meta-analysis. Lancet 2015;385:2047–56. https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0140-6736(14)62459-4 754. Ying A, Arima H, Czernichow S, Woodward M, Huxley R, Turnbull F, et al. Effects of blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular risk according to baseline body-mass index: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2015;385:867–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0140-6736(14)61171-5 755. Nazarzadeh M, Bidel Z, Canoy D, Copland E, Wamil M, Majert J, et al. Blood pressure lowering and risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021;398:1803–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21) 01920-6 756. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, He J, et al. Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet 2005;365:217–23. https://doi. org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)17741-1 757. Jager KJ, Kovesdy C, Langham R, Rosenberg M, Jha V, Zoccali C, et al. A single number for advocacy and communication—worldwide more than 850 million individuals have kidney diseases. Kidney Int 2019;96:1048–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. kint.2019.07.012 758. Foreman KJ, Marquez N, Dolgert A, Fukutaki K, Fullman N, McGaughey M, et al. Forecasting life expectancy, years of life lost, and all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 250 causes of death: reference and alternative scenarios for 2016–40 for 195 countries and territories. Lancet 2018;392:2052–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(18)31694-5 759. Ortiz A, Sanchez-Niño MD, Crespo-Barrio M, De-Sequera-Ortiz P, Fernández-Giráldez E, García-Maset R, et al. The Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENEFRO) commentary to the Spain GBD 2016 report: keeping chronic kidney disease out of sight of health authorities will only magnify the problem. Nefrologia (Engl Ed) 2019;39:29–34. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nefro.2018.09.002 760. Law JP, Pickup L, Pavlovic D, Townend JN, Ferro CJ. Hypertension and cardiomyopathy associated with chronic kidney disease: epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment considerations. J Hum Hypertens 2023;37:1–19. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41371-022-00751-4 761. Fay KS, Cohen DL. Resistant hypertension in people with CKD: a review. Am J Kidney Dis 2021;77:110–21. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2020.04.017 762. Webster AC, Nagler EV, Morton RL, Masson P. Chronic kidney disease. Lancet 2017; 389:1238–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)32064-5 763. Ninomiya T, Perkovic V, Turnbull F, Neal B, Barzi F, Cass A, et al. Blood pressure lowering and major cardiovascular events in people with and without chronic kidney disease: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2013;347:f5680. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.f5680 764. Aggarwal R, Petrie B, Bala W, Chiu N. Mortality outcomes with intensive blood pressure targets in chronic kidney disease patients. Hypertension 2019;73:1275–82. https:// doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.119.12697 765. Bangalore S, Toklu B, Gianos E, Schwartzbard A, Weintraub H, Ogedegbe G, et al. Optimal systolic blood pressure target after SPRINT: insights from a network meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am J Med 2017;130:707–19.e8. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.01.004 766. Lv J, Ehteshami P, Sarnak MJ, Tighiouart H, Jun M, Ninomiya T, et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on the progression of chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ 2013;185:949–57. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj. 121468 767. Tsai WC, Wu HY, Peng YS, Yang J-Y, Chen H-Y, Chiu Y-L, et al. Association of intensive blood pressure control and kidney disease progression in nondiabetic patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:792–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0197 768. Thompson S, Wiebe N, Padwal RS, Gyenes G, Headley SAE, Radhakrishnan J, et al. The effect of exercise on blood pressure in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2019;14:e0211032. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211032 769. Huang M, Lv A, Wang J, Xu N, Ma G, Zhai Z, et al. Exercise training and outcomes in hemodialysis patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Nephrol 2019;50: 240–54. https://doi.org/10.1159/000502447 770. Zhang Y, He D, Zhang W, Xing Y, Guo Y, Wang F, et al. ACE inhibitor benefit to kidney and cardiovascular outcomes for patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease stages 3–5: a network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Drugs 2020;80: 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-020-01290-3 771. Jafar TH, Stark PC, Schmid CH, Landa M, Maschio G, de Jong PE, et al. Progression of chronic kidney disease: the role of blood pressure control, proteinuria, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: a patient-level meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:244–52. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-139-4-200308190-00006 772. Xie X, Liu Y, Perkovic V, Li X, Ninomiya T, Hou W, et al. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CKD: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Am J Kidney Dis 2016;67:728–41. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.10.011 773. Wu HY, Huang JW, Lin HJ, Liao W-C, Peng Y-S, Hung K-Y, et al. Comparative effectiveness of renin-angiotensin system blockers and other antihypertensive drugs in patients with diabetes: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. BMJ 2013;347:f6008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f6008 774. Agarwal R, Sinha AD, Cramer AE, Balmes-Fenwick M, Dickinson JH, Ouyang F, et al. Chlorthalidone for hypertension in advanced chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2021;385:2507–19. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2110730 775. Beddhu S, Shen J, Cheung AK, Kimmel PL, Chertow GM, Wei G, et al. Implications of early decline in eGFR due to intensive BP control for cardiovascular outcomes in SPRINT. J Am Soc Nephrol 2019;30:1523–33. https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.2018121261 776. Herrington WG, Staplin N, Wanner C, Green JB, Hauske SJ, Emberson JR, et al. Empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2023;388: 117–27. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2204233 777. Heerspink HJL, Stefánsson BV, Correa-Rotter R, Chertow GM, Greene T, Hou F-F, et al. Dapagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2020;383: 1436–46. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2024816 778. Pitt B, Filippatos G, Agarwal R, Anker SD, Bakris GL, Rossing P, et al. Cardiovascular events with finerenone in kidney disease and type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2021; 385:2252–63. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2110956 779. Ku E, McCulloch CE, Inker LA, Tighiouart H, Schaefer F, Wühl E, et al. Intensive BP control in patients with CKD and risk for adverse outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol 2023;34:385–93. https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.0000000000000072 780. Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, Berl T, Pohl MA, Lewis JB, et al. Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001;345:851–60. https://doi.org/10.1056/ NEJMoa011303 781. Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, Keane WF, Mitch WE, Parving H-H, et al. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2001;345:861–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/ NEJMoa011161 782. The GISEN Group (Gruppo Italiano di Studi Epidemiologici in Nefrologia). Randomised placebo-controlled trial of effect of ramipril on decline in glomerular filtration rate and risk of terminal renal failure in proteinuric, non-diabetic nephropathy. Lancet 1997;349:1857–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)11445-8 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.102
783. Cruickshank JM, Thorp JM, Zacharias FJ. Benefits and potential harm of lowering high blood pressure. Lancet 1987;1:581–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(87) 90231-5 784. Staessen J, Bulpitt C, Clement D, De Leeuw P, Fagard R, Fletcher A, et al. Relation between mortality and treated blood pressure in elderly patients with hypertension: report of the European working party on high blood pressure in the elderly. BMJ 1989; 298:1552–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.298.6687.1552 785. Böhm M, Schumacher H, Teo KK, Lonn EM, Mahfoud F, Mann JFE, et al. Achieved blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk patients: results from ONTARGET and TRANSCEND trials. Lancet 2017;389:2226–37. https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0140-6736(17)30754-7 786. Böhm M, Ferreira JP, Mahfoud F, Duarte K, Pitt B, Zannad F, et al. Myocardial reperfusion reverses the J-curve association of cardiovascular risk and diastolic blood pressure in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure after myocardial infarction: insights from the EPHESUS trial. Eur Heart J 2020;41:1673–83. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa132 787. McEvoy JW, Chen Y, Rawlings A, Hoogeveen RC, Ballantyne CM, Blumenthal RS, et al. Diastolic blood pressure, subclinical myocardial damage, and cardiac events: implications for blood pressure control. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:1713–22. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.07.754 788. Mancia G, Kreutz R, Brunström M, Burnier M, Grassi G, Januszewicz A, et al. 2023 ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension: Endorsed by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) and the European Renal Association (ERA). J Hypertens 2023;41:1874–2071. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh. 0000000000003480 789. Carvalho JJ, Baruzzi RG, Howard PF, Poulter N, Alpers M P, Franco L J, et al. Blood pressure in four remote populations in the INTERSALT study. Hypertension 1989; 14:238–46. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.14.3.238 790. Birrane JP, Foschi M, Sacco S, McEvoy JW. Another nail in the coffin of causality for the diastolic blood pressure J curve. Hypertension 2022;79:794–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.122.18997 791. Mueller NT, Noya-Alarcon O, Contreras M, Appel LJ, Dominguez-Bello MG. Association of age with blood pressure across the lifespan in isolated Yanomami and Yekwana villages. JAMA Cardiol 2018;3:1247–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio. 2018.3676 792. Ilkun OL, Greene T, Cheung AK, Whelton PK, Wei G, Boucher RE, et al. The influence of baseline diastolic blood pressure on the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2020;43:1878–84. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-2047 793. Shihab S, Boucher RE, Abraham N, Wei G, Beddhu S. Influence of baseline diastolic blood pressure on the effects of intensive systolic blood pressure lowering on the risk of stroke. Hypertension 2022;79:785–93. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 121.18172 794. Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J, et al. 2021 ESC/ EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2022;43: 561–632. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab395 795. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Böhm M, et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3599–726. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab368 796. Mancusi C, de Simone G, Brguljan Hitij J, Sudano I, Mahfoud F, Parati G, et al. Management of patients with combined arterial hypertension and aortic valve stenosis: a consensus document from the Council on Hypertension and Council on Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology, the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2021;7: 242–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa040 797. Nielsen OW, Sajadieh A, Sabbah M, Greve AM, Olsen MH, Boman K, et al. Assessing optimal blood pressure in patients with asymptomatic aortic valve stenosis: the simvastatin ezetimibe in aortic stenosis study (SEAS). Circulation 2016;134:455–68. https:// doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.115.021213 798. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Böhm M, et al. 2023 focused update of the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3627–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehad195 799. Yusuf S, Pfeffer MA, Swedberg K, Granger CB, Held P, McMurray JJV, et al. Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure and preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction: the CHARM-preserved trial. Lancet 2003;362:777–81. https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0140-6736(03)14285-7 800. Pitt B, Pfeffer MA, Assmann SF, Boineau R, Anand IS, Claggett B, et al. Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 2014;370:1383–92. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1313731 801. Nazarzadeh M, Pinho-Gomes AC, Bidel Z, Canoy D, Dehghan A, Byrne KS, et al. Genetic susceptibility, elevated blood pressure, and risk of atrial fibrillation: a Mendelian randomization study. Genome Med 2021;13:38. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13073-021-00849-3 802. Emdin CA, Anderson SG, Salimi-Khorshidi G, Woodward M, MacMahon S, Dwyer T, et al. Usual blood pressure, atrial fibrillation and vascular risk: evidence from 4.3 million adults. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:162–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw053 803. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2021;42: 373–498. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612 804. Alber J, Alladi S, Bae HJ, Barton DA, Beckett LA, Bell JM, et al. White matter hyperintensities in vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID): knowledge gaps and opportunities. Alzheimers Dement (N Y) 2019;5:107–17. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.trci.2019.02.001 805. Georgakis MK, Duering M, Wardlaw JM, Dichgans M. WMH and long-term outcomes in ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurology 2019;92: e1298–308. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000007142 806. Jokinen H, Koikkalainen J, Laakso HM, Melkas S, Nieminen T, Brander A, et al. Global burden of small vessel disease-related brain changes on MRI predicts cognitive and functional decline. Stroke 2020;51:170–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.119.026170 807. Potter T, Lioutas VA, Tano M, Pan A, Meeks J, Woo D, et al. Cognitive impairment after intracerebral hemorrhage: a systematic review of current evidence and knowledge gaps. Front Neurol 2021;12:716632. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.716632 808. Wang F, Hua S, Zhang Y, Zhu J, Liu R, Jiang Z. Association between small vessel disease markers, medial temporal lobe atrophy and cognitive impairment after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2021;30:105460. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105460 809. Ungvari Z, Toth P, Tarantini S, Prodan CI, Sorond F, Merkely B, et al. Hypertension-induced cognitive impairment: from pathophysiology to public health. Nat Rev Nephrol 2021;17:639–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41581-021-00430-6 810. Kelly D, Rothwell PM. Disentangling the multiple links between renal dysfunction and cerebrovascular disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2020;91:88–97. https://doi.org/ 10.1136/jnnp-2019-320526 811. Papanastasiou CA, Theochari CA, Zareifopoulos N, Arfaras-Melainis A, Giannakoulas G, Karamitsos TD, et al. Atrial fibrillation is associated with cognitive impairment, allcause dementia, vascular dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med 2021;36:3122–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606- 021-06954-8 812. Li J, Wu Y, Zhang D, Nie J. Associations between heart failure and risk of dementia: a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020;99:e18492. https://doi. org/10.1097/md.0000000000018492 813. Canavan M, O’Donnell MJ. Hypertension and cognitive impairment: a review of mechanisms and key concepts. Front Neurol 2022;13:821135. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fneur.2022.821135 814. Dawson J, Béjot Y, Christensen LM, De Marchis GM, Dichgans M, Hagberg G, et al. European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline on pharmacological interventions for long-term secondary prevention after ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Eur Stroke J 2022;7:I–XLI. https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873221100032 815. Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, Cockroft KM, Gutierrez J, Lombardi-Hill D, et al. 2021 Guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2021;52:e364–467. https://doi.org/10.1161/str.0000000000000375 816. Zonneveld TP, Richard E, Vergouwen MD, Nederkoorn PJ, de Haan RJ, Roos YB, et al. Blood pressure-lowering treatment for preventing recurrent stroke, major vascular events, and dementia in patients with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;7:CD007858. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD007858.pub2 817. Boncoraglio GB, Del Giovane C, Tramacere I. Antihypertensive drugs for secondary prevention after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2021;52:1974–82. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.120.031945 818. Fischer U, Cooney MT, Bull LM, Silver LE, Chalmers J, Anderson CS, et al. Acute poststroke blood pressure relative to premorbid levels in intracerebral haemorrhage versus major ischaemic stroke: a population-based study. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:374–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(14)70031-6 819. Yusuf S, Diener HC, Sacco RL, Cotton D, Ôunpuu S, Lawton WA, et al. Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1225–37. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0804593 820. PROGRESS Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Lancet 2001;358:1033–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(01)06178-5 821. McGurgan IJ, Kelly PJ, Turan TN, Rothwell PM. Long-term secondary prevention: management of blood pressure after a transient ischemic attack or stroke. Stroke 2022;53: 1085–103. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.121.035851 822. Rudd AG, Bowen A, Young GR, James MA. The latest national clinical guideline for stroke. Clin Med (Lond) 2017;17:154–5. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.17-2-154
ESC Guidelines 4013
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.103
823. Arima H, Chalmers J, Woodward M, Anderson C, Rodgers A, Davis S, et al. Lower target blood pressures are safe and effective for the prevention of recurrent stroke: the PROGRESS trial. J Hypertens 2006;24:1201–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh. 0000226212.34055.86 824. Kitagawa K, Yamamoto Y, Arima H, Maeda T, Sunami N, Kanzawa T, et al. Effect of standard vs intensive blood pressure control on the risk of recurrent stroke: a randomized clinical trial and meta-analysis. JAMA Neurol 2019;76:1309–18. https://doi.org/10. 1001/jamaneurol.2019.2167 825. Suchard MA, Schuemie MJ, Krumholz HM, You SC, Chen R, Pratt N, et al. Comprehensive comparative effectiveness and safety of first-line antihypertensive drug classes: a systematic, multinational, large-scale analysis. Lancet 2019;394: 1816–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)32317-7 826. Wang WT, You LK, Chiang CE, Sung S-H, Chuang S-Y, Cheng H-M, et al. Comparative effectiveness of blood pressure-lowering drugs in patients who have already suffered from stroke: traditional and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e3302. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000003302 827. Bath PM, Scutt P, Blackburn DJ, Ankolekar S, Krishnan K, Ballard C, et al. Intensive versus guideline blood pressure and lipid lowering in patients with previous stroke: main results from the pilot ‘Prevention of Decline in Cognition after Stroke Trial’ (PODCAST) randomised controlled trial. PLoS One 2017;12:e0164608. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164608 828. Mant J, McManus RJ, Roalfe A, Fletcher K, Taylor CJ, Martin U, et al. Different systolic blood pressure targets for people with history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack: PAST-BP (Prevention After Stroke—Blood Pressure) randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2016;352:i708. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i708 829. Kolmos M, Christoffersen L, Kruuse C. Recurrent ischemic stroke—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2021;30:105935. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2021.105935 830. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, Ames D, Ballard C, Banerjee S, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. Lancet 2020;396:413–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30367-6 831. Ou YN, Tan CC, Shen XN, Xu W, Hou X-H, Dong Q, et al. Blood pressure and risks of cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 209 prospective studies. Hypertension 2020;76:217–25. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.120.14993 832. Abell JG, Kivimäki M, Dugravot A, Tabak AG, Fayosse A, Shipley M, et al. Association between systolic blood pressure and dementia in the Whitehall II cohort study: role of age, duration, and threshold used to define hypertension. Eur Heart J 2018;39: 3119–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy288 833. Alpérovitch A, Blachier M, Soumaré A, Ritchie K, Dartigues J-F, Richard-Harston S, et al. Blood pressure variability and risk of dementia in an elderly cohort, the Three-City study. Alzheimers Dement 2014;10:S330–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jalz.2013.05.1777 834. McGrath ER, Beiser AS, DeCarli C, Plourde KL, Vasan RS, Greenberg S, et al. Blood pressure from mid- to late life and risk of incident dementia. Neurology 2017;89: 2447–54. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000004741 835. Skoog I, Nilsson L, Persson G, Lernfelt B, Landahl S, Palmertz B, et al. 15-year longitudinal study of blood pressure and dementia. Lancet 1996;347:1141–5. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90608-x 836. Launer LJ, Masaki K, Petrovitch H, Foley D, Havlik RJ. The association between midlife blood pressure levels and late-life cognitive function. The Honolulu-Asia aging study. JAMA 1995;274:1846–51. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03530230032026 837. Gottesman RF, Albert MS, Alonso A, Coker LH, Coresh J, Davis SM, et al. Associations between midlife vascular risk factors and 25-year incident dementia in the atherosclerosis risk in Communities (ARIC) cohort. JAMA Neurol 2017;74:1246–54. https://doi. org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.1658 838. Levine DA, Springer MV, Brodtmann A. Blood pressure and vascular cognitive impairment. Stroke 2022;53:1104–13. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.121.036140 839. Bosch J, O’Donnell M, Swaminathan B, Lonn EM, Sharma M, Dagenais G, et al. Effects of blood pressure and lipid lowering on cognition: results from the HOPE-3 study. Neurology 2019;92:e1435–46. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000007174 840. Applegate WB, Pressel S, Wittes J, Luhr J, Shekelle RB, Camel GH, et al. Impact of the treatment of isolated systolic hypertension on behavioral variables. Results from the systolic hypertension in the elderly program. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:2154–60. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1994.00420190047006 841. Williamson JD, Pajewski NM, Auchus AP, Bryan RN, Chelune G, Cheung AK, et al. Effect of intensive vs standard blood pressure control on probable dementia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2019;321:553–61. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.21442 842. Peters R, Beckett N, Forette F, Tuomilehto J, Clarke R, Ritchie C, et al. Incident dementia and blood pressure lowering in the Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial cognitive function assessment (HYVET-COG): a double-blind, placebo controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:683–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(08)70143-1 843. Lithell H, Hansson L, Skoog I, Elmfeldt D, Hofman A, Olofsson B, et al. The Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE): principal results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial. J Hypertens 2003;21:875–86. https://doi.org/10.1097/ 00004872-200305000-00011 844. White WB, Wakefield DB, Moscufo N, Guttmann CRG, Kaplan RF, Bohannon RW, et al. Effects of intensive versus standard ambulatory blood pressure control on cerebrovascular outcomes in older people (INFINITY). Circulation 2019;140:1626–35. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.119.041603 845. Tzourio C, Anderson C, Chapman N, Woodward M, Neal B, MacMahon S, et al. Effects of blood pressure lowering with perindopril and indapamide therapy on dementia and cognitive decline in patients with cerebrovascular disease. Arch Intern Med 2003;163:1069–75. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.163.9.1069 846. Peters R, Yasar S, Anderson CS, Andrews S, Antikainen R, Arima H, et al. Investigation of antihypertensive class, dementia, and cognitive decline: a meta-analysis. Neurology 2020;94:e267–81. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008732 847. Yang W, Luo H, Ma Y, Si S, Zhao H. Effects of antihypertensive drugs on cognitive function in elderly patients with hypertension: a review. Aging Dis 2021;12:841–51. https:// doi.org/10.14336/ad.2020.1111 848. Iseli R, Nguyen VTV, Sharmin S, Reijnierse EM, Lim WK, Maier AB, et al. Orthostatic hypotension and cognition in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Exp Gerontol 2019;120:40–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2019.02.017 849. Ernst ME, Ryan J, Chowdhury EK, Margolis KL, Beilin LJ, Reid CM, et al. Long-term blood pressure variability and risk of cognitive decline and dementia among older adults. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e019613. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.120.019613 850. Nakamura K, Stefanescu Schmidt A. Treatment of hypertension in coarctation of the aorta. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 2016;18:40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936- 016-0462-x 851. Dijkema EJ, Leiner T, Grotenhuis HB. Diagnosis, imaging and clinical management of aortic coarctation. Heart 2017;103:1148–55. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2017- 311173 852. Panzer J, Bové T, Vandekerckhove K, De Wolf D. Hypertension after coarctation repair-a systematic review. Transl Pediatr 2022;11:270–9. https://doi.org/10.21037/ tp-21-418 853. Schaefer BM, Lewin MB, Stout KK, Gill E, Prueitt A, Byers P H, et al. The bicuspid aortic valve: an integrated phenotypic classification of leaflet morphology and aortic root shape. Heart 2008;94:1634–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2007.132092 854. Wang J, Deng W, Lv Q, Li Y, Liu T, Xie M, et al. Aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. Front Physiol 2021;12:615175. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2021. 615175 855. Davies RR, Kaple RK, Mandapati D, Gallo A, Botta DM, Elefteriades JA, et al. Natural history of ascending aortic aneurysms in the setting of an unreplaced bicuspid aortic valve. Ann Thorac Surg 2007;83:1338–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006. 10.074 856. Lindman BR, Otto CM. Time to treat hypertension in patients with aortic stenosis. Circulation 2013;128:1281–3. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.113.005275 857. Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, Bossone E, Di Bartolomeo R, Eggebrecht H, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2014;35:2873–926. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/ehu281 858. Shores J, Berger KR, Murphy EA, Pyeritz RE. Progression of aortic dilatation and the benefit of long-term beta-adrenergic blockade in Marfan’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1335–41. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199405123301902 859. Groenink M, den Hartog AW, Franken R, Radonic T, de Waard V, Timmermans J, et al. Losartan reduces aortic dilatation rate in adults with Marfan syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Heart J 2013;34:3491–500. https://doi.org/10.1093/ eurheartj/eht334 860. Pitcher A, Spata E, Emberson J, Davies K, Halls H, Holland L, et al. Angiotensin receptor blockers and β blockers in Marfan syndrome: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2022;400:822–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01534-3 861. Mazzolai L, Rodriguez-Palomares JF, Teixido-Tura G, Lanzi S, Boc V, Bossone E, et al. 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management peripheral arterial and aortic diseases. Eur Heart J 2024;45:3538–700. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae179 862. Rechel B, Mladovsky P, Ingleby D, Mackenbach JP, McKee M. Migration and health in an increasingly diverse Europe. Lancet 2013;381:1235–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(12)62086-8 863. Modesti PA, Reboldi G, Cappuccio FP, Agyemang C, Remuzzi G, Rapi S, et al. Panethnic differences in blood pressure in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016;11:e0147601. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147601 864. Whelton PK, Einhorn PT, Muntner P, Appel LJ, Cushman WC, Diez Roux AV, et al. Research needs to improve hypertension treatment and control in African Americans. Hypertension 2016;68:1066–72. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.116.07905 865. Kaufman JS, Cooper RS, McGee DL. Socioeconomic status and health in blacks and whites: the problem of residual confounding and the resiliency of race. Epidemiology 1997;8:621–8. 866. Agyemang C, van Oeffelen AA, Norredam M, Kappelle LJ, Klijn CJM, Bots ML, et al. Socioeconomic inequalities in stroke incidence among migrant groups: analysis of nationwide data. Stroke 2014;45:2397–403. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha. 114.005505 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.104
867. Mehanna M, Gong Y, McDonough CW, Beitelshees AL, Gums JG, Chapman AB, et al. Blood pressure response to metoprolol and chlorthalidone in European and African Americans with hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2017;19:1301–8. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jch.13094 868. Faconti L, McNally RJ, Farukh B, Adeyemi O, Cruickshank JK, Wilkinson IB, et al. Differences in hypertension phenotypes between Africans and Europeans: role of environment. J Hypertens 2020;38:1278–85. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002403 869. Schutte AE, Kruger R, Gafane-Matemane LF, Breet Y, Strauss-Kruger M, Cruickshank JK, et al. Ethnicity and arterial stiffness. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2020;40:1044–54. https://doi.org/10.1161/atvbaha.120.313133 870. Erlinger TP, Vollmer WM, Svetkey LP, Appel LJ. The potential impact of nonpharmacologic population-wide blood pressure reduction on coronary heart disease events: pronounced benefits in African-Americans and hypertensives. Prev Med 2003;37: 327–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0091-7435(03)00140-3 871. The ALLHAT Officers Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002;288: 2981–97. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.288.23.2981 872. Wright JT Jr, Dunn JK, Cutler JA, Davis BR, Cushman WC, Ford CE, et al. Outcomes in hypertensive black and nonblack patients treated with chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril. JAMA 2005;293:1595–608. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.13.1595 873. Wright JT Jr, Harris-Haywood S, Pressel S, Barzilay J, Baimbridge C, Bareis CJ, et al. Clinical outcomes by race in hypertensive patients with and without the metabolic syndrome: antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT). Arch Intern Med 2008;168:207–17. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed. 2007.66 874. Ojji DB, Mayosi B, Francis V, Badri M, Cornelius V, Smythe W, et al. Comparison of dual therapies for lowering blood pressure in Black Africans. N Engl J Med 2019; 380:2429–39. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1901113 875. van der Linden EL, Couwenhoven BN, Beune E, Daams JG, van den Born B-JH, Agyemang C. Hypertension awareness, treatment and control among ethnic minority populations in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 2021;39: 202–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002651 876. Agyemang C, Nyaaba G, Beune E, Meeks K, Owusu-Dabo E, Addo J, et al. Variations in hypertension awareness, treatment, and control among Ghanaian migrants living in Amsterdam, Berlin, London, and nonmigrant Ghanaians living in rural and urban Ghana—the RODAM study. J Hypertens 2018;36:169–77. https://doi.org/10.1097/ hjh.0000000000001520 877. van Laer SD, Snijder MB, Agyemang C, Peters RJ, van den Born BH. Ethnic differences in hypertension prevalence and contributing determinants – the HELIUS study. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2018;25:1914–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487318803241 878. Costello HM, Gumz ML. Circadian rhythm, clock genes, and hypertension: recent advances in hypertension. Hypertension 2021;78:1185–96. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.121.14519 879. O’Brien E, Sheridan J, O’Malley K. Dippers and non-dippers. Lancet 1988;2:397. https:// doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(88)92867-x 880. Pickering TG, Shimbo D, Haas D. Ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring. N Engl J Med 2006;354:2368–74. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra060433 881. Abdalla M, Goldsmith J, Muntner P, Diaz KM, Reynolds K, Schwartz JE, et al. Is isolated nocturnal hypertension a reproducible phenotype? Am J Hypertens 2016;29:33–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpv058 882. Mancia G, Facchetti R, Bombelli M, Quarti-Trevano F, Cuspidi C, Grassi G. Short- and long-term reproducibility of nighttime blood pressure phenotypes and nocturnal blood pressure reduction. Hypertension 2021;77:1745–55. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.120.16827 883. Nolde JM, Kiuchi MG, Lugo-Gavidia LM, Ho JK, Chan J, Matthews VB, et al. Nocturnal hypertension: a common phenotype in a tertiary clinical setting associated with increased arterial stiffness and central blood pressure. J Hypertens 2021;39:250–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002620 884. Thomas SJ, Booth JN III, Jaeger BC, Hubbard D, Sakhuja S, Abdalla M, et al. Association of sleep characteristics with nocturnal hypertension and nondipping blood pressure in the CARDIA study. J Am Heart Assoc 2020;9:e015062. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha. 119.015062 885. Kario K, Hoshide S, Haimoto H, Yamagiwa K, Uchiba K, Nagasaka S, et al. Sleep blood pressure self-measured at home as a novel determinant of organ damage: Japan morning surge home blood pressure (J-HOP) study. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2015;17: 340–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.12500 886. de la Sierra A, Gorostidi M, Banegas JR, Segura J, de la Cruz JJ, Ruilope LM, et al. Nocturnal hypertension or nondipping: which is better associated with the cardiovascular risk profile? Am J Hypertens 2014;27:680–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpt175 887. Wijkman M, Länne T, Engvall J, Lindström T, Östgren CJ, Nystrom FH, et al. Masked nocturnal hypertension—a novel marker of risk in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 2009;52:1258–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-009-1369-9 888. Muntner P, Lewis CE, Diaz KM, Carson AP, Kim Y, Calhoun D, et al. Racial differences in abnormal ambulatory blood pressure monitoring measures: results from the coronary artery risk development in young adults (CARDIA) study. Am J Hypertens 2015;28:640–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpu193 889. Thomas SJ, Booth JN III, Bromfield SG, Seals SR, Spruill TM, Ogedegbe G, et al. Clinic and ambulatory blood pressure in a population-based sample of African Americans: the Jackson heart study. J Am Soc Hypertens 2017;11:204–212.e205. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jash.2017.02.001 890. Husain A, Lin FC, Tuttle LA, Olsson E, Viera AJ. The reproducibility of racial differences in ambulatory blood pressure phenotypes and measurements. Am J Hypertens 2017; 30:961–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpx079 891. Li Y, Wang JG. Isolated nocturnal hypertension: a disease masked in the dark. Hypertension 2013;61:278–83. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.00217 892. Hoshide S, Kario K, de la Sierra A, Bilo G, Schillaci G, Banegas JR, et al. Ethnic differences in the degree of morning blood pressure surge and in its determinants between Japanese and European hypertensive subjects: data from the ARTEMIS study. Hypertension 2015;66:750–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.05958 893. Banegas JR, Ruilope LM, de la Sierra A, Gorostidi M, Segura J, Martell N, et al. High prevalence of masked uncontrolled hypertension in people with treated hypertension. Eur Heart J 2014;35:3304–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu016 894. Huang JF, Zhang DY, Sheng CS, An D-W, Li M, Cheng Y-B, et al. Isolated nocturnal hypertension in relation to host and environmental factors and clock genes. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2022;24:1255–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.14532 895. Matsumoto T, Tabara Y, Murase K, Setoh K, Kawaguchi T, Nagashima S, et al. Nocturia and increase in nocturnal blood pressure: the Nagahama study. J Hypertens 2018;36: 2185–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000001802 896. Seif F, Patel SR, Walia HK, Rueschman M, Bhatt DL, Blumenthal RS, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and diurnal nondipping hemodynamic indices in patients at increased cardiovascular risk. J Hypertens 2014;32:267–75. https://doi.org/10. 1097/hjh.0000000000000011 897. Kimura G, Dohi Y, Fukuda M. Salt sensitivity and circadian rhythm of blood pressure: the keys to connect CKD with cardiovascular events. Hypertens Res 2010;33:515–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/hr.2010.47 898. Drawz PE, Alper AB, Anderson AH, Brecklin CS, Charleston J, Chen J, et al. Masked hypertension and elevated nighttime blood pressure in CKD: prevalence and association with target organ damage. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016;11:642–52. https://doi. org/10.2215/cjn.08530815 899. Kanno A, Metoki H, Kikuya M, Terawaki H, Hara A, Hashimoto T, et al. Usefulness of assessing masked and white-coat hypertension by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for determining prevalent risk of chronic kidney disease: the Ohasama study. Hypertens Res 2010;33:1192–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/hr.2010.139 900. Kushiro T, Kario K, Saito I, Teramukai S, Sato Y, Okuda Y, et al. Increased cardiovascular risk of treated white coat and masked hypertension in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the HONEST study. Hypertens Res 2017;40:87–95. https://doi. org/10.1038/hr.2016.87 901. Lurbe E, Redon J, Kesani A, Pascual JM, Tacons J, Alvarez V, et al. Increase in nocturnal blood pressure and progression to microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2002;347:797–805. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa013410 902. Cuspidi C, Sala C, Tadic M, Gherbesi E, De Giorgi A, Grassi G, et al. Clinical and prognostic significance of a reverse dipping pattern on ambulatory monitoring: an updated review. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2017;19:713–21. https://doi.org/10. 1111/jch.13023 903. Wu Q, Hong M, Xu J, Tang X, Zhu L, Gao P, et al. Diurnal blood pressure pattern and cardiac damage in hypertensive patients with primary aldosteronism. Endocrine 2021; 72:835–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-021-02606-3 904. Kario K, Hoshide S, Mizuno H, Kabutoya T, Nishizawa M, Yoshida T, et al. Nighttime blood pressure phenotype and cardiovascular prognosis: practitioner-based nationwide JAMP study. Circulation 2020;142:1810–20. https://doi.org/10.1161/ circulationaha.120.049730 905. Kario K, Hoshide S, Nagai M, Okawara Y, Kanegae H. Sleep and cardiovascular outcomes in relation to nocturnal hypertension: the J-HOP nocturnal blood pressure study. Hypertens Res 2021;44:1589–96. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-021-00709-y 906. Wang Q, Wang Y, Wang J, Zhang L, Zhao MH. Nocturnal systolic hypertension and adverse prognosis in patients with CKD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2021;16:356–64. https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.14420920 907. Hansen TW, Li Y, Boggia J, Thijs L, Richart T, Staessen JA. Predictive role of the nighttime blood pressure. Hypertension 2011;57:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 109.133900 908. Staessen JA, Thijs L, Fagard R, O’Brien ET, Clement D, de Leeuw PW, et al. Predicting cardiovascular risk using conventional vs ambulatory blood pressure in older patients with systolic hypertension. JAMA 1999;282:539–46. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.6.539 909. Verdecchia P, Porcellati C, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Battistelli M, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure. An independent predictor of prognosis in essential hypertension. Hypertension 1994;24:793–801. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.24.6.793 910. Ohkubo T, Hozawa A, Yamaguchi J, Kikuya M, Ohmori K, Michimata M, et al. Prognostic significance of the nocturnal decline in blood pressure in individuals with and without high 24-h blood pressure: the Ohasama study. J Hypertens 2002;20: 2183–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004872-200211000-00017
ESC Guidelines 4015
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.105
911. Nagai M, Hoshide S, Ishikawa J, Shimada K, Kario K. Ambulatory blood pressure as an independent determinant of brain atrophy and cognitive function in elderly hypertension. J Hypertens 2008;26:1636–41. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283018333 912. Staessen JA, Thijs L, Ohkubo T, Kikuya M, Richart T, Boggia J, et al. Thirty years of research on diagnostic and therapeutic thresholds for the self-measured blood pressure at home. Blood Press Monit 2008;13:352–65. https://doi.org/10.1097/ MBP.0b013e3283108f93 913. Kario K, Shimada K. Risers and extreme-dippers of nocturnal blood pressure in hypertension: antihypertensive strategy for nocturnal blood pressure. Clin Exp Hypertens 2004;26:177–89. https://doi.org/10.1081/ceh-120028556 914. Tan X, Sundström J, Lind L, Franzon K, Kilander L, Benedict C, et al. Reverse dipping of systolic blood pressure is associated with increased dementia risk in older men: a longitudinal study over 24 years. Hypertension 2021;77:1383–90. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.120.16711 915. Judd E, Calhoun DA. Apparent and true resistant hypertension: definition, prevalence and outcomes. J Hum Hypertens 2014;28:463–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2013.140 916. Denker MG, Haddad DB, Townsend RR, Cohen DL. Blood pressure control 1 year after referral to a hypertension specialist. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2013;15: 624–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.12146 917. Blumenthal JA, Hinderliter AL, Smith PJ, Mabe S, Watkins LL, Craighead L, et al. Effects of lifestyle modification on patients with resistant hypertension: results of the TRIUMPH randomized clinical trial. Circulation 2021;144:1212–26. https://doi.org/10. 1161/circulationaha.121.055329 918. Hung SC, Kuo KL, Peng CH, Wu C-H, Lien Y-C, Wang Y-C, et al. Volume overload correlates with cardiovascular risk factors in patients with chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int 2014;85:703–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2013.336 919. Taler SJ, Textor SC, Augustine JE. Resistant hypertension: comparing hemodynamic management to specialist care. Hypertension 2002;39:982–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/ 01.hyp.0000016176.16042.2f 920. Gaddam KK, Nishizaka MK, Pratt-Ubunama MN, Pimenta E, Aban I, Oparil S, et al. Characterization of resistant hypertension: association between resistant hypertension, aldosterone, and persistent intravascular volume expansion. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1159–64. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.11.1159 921. Roush GC, Ernst ME, Kostis JB, Tandon S, Sica DA. Head-to-head comparisons of hydrochlorothiazide with indapamide and chlorthalidone: antihypertensive and metabolic effects. Hypertension 2015;65:1041–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 114.05021 922. Peterzan MA, Hardy R, Chaturvedi N, Hughes AD. Meta-analysis of dose-response relationships for hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone, and bendroflumethiazide on blood pressure, serum potassium, and urate. Hypertension 2012;59:1104–9. https://doi.org/ 10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.190637 923. Chen C, Zhu XY, Li D, Lin Q, Zhou K. Clinical efficacy and safety of spironolactone in patients with resistant hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020;99:e21694. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000021694 924. Zhao D, Liu H, Dong P, Zhao J. A meta-analysis of add-on use of spironolactone in patients with resistant hypertension. Int J Cardiol 2017;233:113–7. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ijcard.2016.12.158 925. Bazoukis G, Thomopoulos C, Tsioufis C. Effect of mineralocorticoid antagonists on blood pressure lowering: overview and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in hypertension. J Hypertens 2018;36:987–94. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh. 0000000000001671 926. Oxlund CS, Henriksen JE, Tarnow L, Schousboe K, Gram J, Jacobsen IA. Low dose spironolactone reduces blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a double blind randomized clinical trial. J Hypertens 2013;31: 2094–102. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283638b1a 927. Desai R, Park H, Brown JD, Mohandas R, Pepine CJ, Smith SM. Comparative safety and effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists versus beta-blockers as fourth agents in patients with apparent resistant hypertension. Hypertension 2022;79:2305–15. https:// doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.122.19280 928. Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, Kopp A, Austin PC, Laupacis A, et al. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the randomized aldactone evaluation study. N Engl J Med 2004;351:543–51. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa040135 929. Agarwal R, Rossignol P, Romero A, Garza D, Mayo MR, Warren S, et al. Patiromer versus placebo to enable spironolactone use in patients with resistant hypertension and chronic kidney disease (AMBER): a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebocontrolled trial. Lancet 2019;394:1540–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19) 32135-x 930. Burton TJ, Mackenzie IS, Balan K, Koo B, Bird N, Soloviev DV, et al. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of (11)C-metomidate positron emission tomography (PET)-CT for lateralizing aldosterone secretion by Conn’s adenomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:100–9. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-1537 931. Rossi GP, Maiolino G, Seccia TM. Adrenal venous sampling: where do we stand? Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2019;48:843–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecl. 2019.08.012 932. Wu X, Senanayake R, Goodchild E, Bashari WA, Salsbury J, Cabrera CP, et al. [(11)C] metomidate PET-CT versus adrenal vein sampling for diagnosing surgically curable primary aldosteronism: a prospective, within-patient trial. Nat Med 2023;29: 190–202. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-02114-5 933. Lenzini L, Prisco S, Caroccia B, Rossi GP. Saga of familial hyperaldosteronism: yet a new channel. Hypertension 2018;71:1010–4. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 118.11150 934. Parthasarathy HK, Ménard J, White WB, Young WF, Williams GH, Williams B, et al. A double-blind, randomized study comparing the antihypertensive effect of eplerenone and spironolactone in patients with hypertension and evidence of primary aldosteronism. J Hypertens 2011;29:980–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283455ca5 935. Shagjaa T, Sanga V, Rossi GP. Skin hyperpigmentation due to post-surgical adrenal insufficiency regressed with the dexamethasone treatment. J Clin Med 2022;11:5379. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11185379 936. Sanga V, Lenzini L, Seccia TM, Rossi GP. Familial hyperaldosteronism type 1 and pregnancy: successful treatment with low dose dexamethasone. Blood Press 2021;30: 133–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08037051.2020.1863771 937. Persu A, Touzé E, Mousseaux E, Barral X, Joffre F, Plouin P-F. Diagnosis and management of fibromuscular dysplasia: an expert consensus. Eur J Clin Invest 2012;42:338–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2362.2011.02577.x 938. Wheatley K, Ives N, Gray R, Kalra PA, Moss JG, Baigent C, et al. Revascularization versus medical therapy for renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1953–62. https:// doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0905368 939. Cooper CJ, Murphy TP, Cutlip DE, Jamerson K, Henrich W, Reid DM, et al. Stenting and medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2014;370: 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1310753 940. Bailey SR, Beckman JA, Dao TD, Misra S, Sobieszczyk PS, White CJ, et al. ACC/AHA/ SCAI/SIR/SVM 2018 appropriate use criteria for peripheral artery intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, and Society for Vascular Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:214–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.002 941. Trinquart L, Mounier-Vehier C, Sapoval M, Gagnon N, Plouin PF. Efficacy of revascularization for renal artery stenosis caused by fibromuscular dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 2010;56:525–32. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.110.152918 942. Sanga V, Bertoli E, Crimì F, Barbiero G, Battistel M, Teresa Seccia M, et al. Pickering syndrome: an overlooked renovascular cause of recurrent heart failure. J Am Heart Assoc 2023;12:e030474. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.123.030474 943. Bhalla V, Textor SC, Beckman JA, Casanegra AI, Cooper CJ, Kim ESH, et al. Revascularization for renovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2022;79:e128–43. https://doi.org/10. 1161/hyp.0000000000000217 944. Bravo E, Fouad-Tarazi F, Rossi G, Imamura M, Lin WW, Madkour MA, et al. A reevaluation of the hemodynamics of pheochromocytoma. Hypertension 1990;15: I128–131. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.15.2_suppl.i128 945. Cohen JB, Brown NJ, Brown SA, Dent S, van Dorst DCH, Herrmann SM, et al. Cancer therapy-related hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2023;80:e46–57. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp. 0000000000000224 946. Lyon AR, López-Fernández T, Couch LS, Asteggiano R, Aznar MC, Bergler-Klein J, et al. ESC guidelines on cardio-oncology developed in collaboration with the European Hematology Association (EHA), the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS). Eur Heart J 2022;43:4229–361. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac244 947. Boulestreau R, van den Born BH, Lip GYH, Gupta A. Malignant hypertension: current perspectives and challenges. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e023397. https://doi.org/10. 1161/jaha.121.023397 948. Ma L, Hu X, Song L, Chen X, Ouyang M, Billot L, et al. The third intensive care bundle with blood pressure reduction in acute cerebral haemorrhage trial (INTERACT3): an international, stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2023;402: 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)00806-1 949. Moullaali TJ, Wang X, Sandset EC, Woodhouse LJ, Law ZK, Arima H, et al. Early lowering of blood pressure after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2022;93: 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2021-327195 950. Wang X, Di Tanna GL, Moullaali TJ, Martin R’ H, Shipes VB, Robinson TG, et al. J-shape relation of blood pressure reduction and outcome in acute intracerebral hemorrhage: a pooled analysis of INTERACT2 and ATACH-II individual participant data. Int J Stroke 2022;17:1129–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930211064076 951. Qureshi AI, Huang W, Lobanova I, Barsan WG, Hanley DF, Hsu CY, et al. Outcomes of intensive systolic blood pressure reduction in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage and excessively high initial systolic blood pressure: post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol 2020;77:1355–65. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamaneurol.2020.3075 952. Bath PM, Krishnan K. Interventions for deliberately altering blood pressure in acute stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;2014:CD000039. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 14651858.CD000039.pub3 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.106
953. Berge E, Whiteley W, Audebert H, De Marchis GM, Fonseca AC, Padiglioni C, et al. European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines on intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke. Eur Stroke J 2021;6:I–LXII. https://doi.org/10.1177/2396987321989865 954. LeCouffe NE, Kappelhof M, Treurniet KM, Lingsma HF, Zhang G, van den Wijngaard IR, et al. 2B, 2C, or 3: what should be the angiographic target for endovascular treatment in ischemic stroke? Stroke 2020;51:1790–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha. 119.028891 955. Mistry EA, Hart KW, Davis LT, Gao Y, Prestigiacomo CJ, Mittal S, et al. Blood pressure management after endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: the BEST-II randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2023;330:821–31. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.14330 956. Lee M, Ovbiagele B, Hong KS, Wu Y-L, Lee J-E, Rao NM, et al. Effect of blood pressure lowering in early ischemic stroke: meta-analysis. Stroke 2015;46:1883–9. https://doi. org/10.1161/strokeaha.115.009552 957. Anderson CS, Huang Y, Lindley RI, Chen X, Arima H, Chen G, et al. Intensive blood pressure reduction with intravenous thrombolysis therapy for acute ischaemic stroke (ENCHANTED): an international, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2019;393:877–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30038-8 958. Mazighi M, Richard S, Lapergue B, Sibon I, Gory B, Berge J, et al. Safety and efficacy of intensive blood pressure lowering after successful endovascular therapy in acute ischaemic stroke (BP-TARGET): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2021;20:265–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(20)30483-x 959. Yang P, Song L, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Chen X, Li Y, et al. Intensive blood pressure control after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke (ENCHANTED2/MT): a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2022; 400:1585–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01882-7 960. Sandset EC, Anderson CS, Bath PM, Christensen H, Fischer U, Gąsecki D, et al. European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines on blood pressure management in acute ischaemic stroke and intracerebral haemorrhage. Eur Stroke J 2021;6: Xlviii–lxxxix. https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873211012133 961. Anderson CS, Heeley E, Huang Y, Wang J, Stapf C, Delcourt C, et al. Rapid bloodpressure lowering in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2355–65. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1214609 962. Qureshi AI, Palesch YY, Barsan WG, Hanley DF, Hsu CY, Martin RL, et al. Intensive blood-pressure lowering in patients with acute cerebral hemorrhage. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1033–43. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1603460 963. Moullaali TJ, Wang X, Woodhouse LJ, Law ZK, Delcourt C, Sprigg N, et al. Lowering blood pressure after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data from randomised controlled trials participating in the blood pressure in acute stroke collaboration (BASC). BMJ Open 2019;9:e030121. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030121 964. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG practice bulletin, number 222. Obstet Gynecol 2020;135: e237–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003891 965. Garovic VD, Dechend R, Easterling T, Karumanchi SA, Baird SM, Magee LA, et al. Hypertension in pregnancy: diagnosis, blood pressure goals, and pharmacotherapy: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2022;79: e21–41. https://doi.org/10.1161/hyp.0000000000000208 966. Magee LA, Nicolaides KH, von Dadelszen P. Preeclampsia. N Engl J Med 2022;386: 1817–32. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2109523 967. Altman D, Carroli G, Duley L, Farrell B, Moodley J, Neilson J, et al. Do women with pre-eclampsia, and their babies, benefit from magnesium sulphate? The Magpie trial: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;359:1877–90. https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0140-6736(02)08778-0 968. Poon LC, Magee LA, Verlohren S, Shennan A, von Dadelszen P, Sheiner E, et al. A literature review and best practice advice for second and third trimester risk stratification, monitoring, and management of pre-eclampsia: compiled by the pregnancy and non-communicable diseases committee of FIGO (the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics). Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2021;154 Suppl 1:3–31. https:// doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13763 969. Muhammad S, Usman H, Dawha YM, Yahya A, Yekeen A, Bako B. Comparison of intravenous labetalol and hydralazine for severe hypertension in pregnancy in Northeastern Nigeria: a randomized controlled trial. Pregnancy Hypertens 2022;29: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2022.05.001 970. Magee LA, Cham C, Waterman EJ, Ohlsson A, von Dadelszen P. Hydralazine for treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy: meta-analysis. BMJ 2003;327:955–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7421.955 971. Wu HZ, Cheng Y, Yu D, Li J-B, Jiang Y-F, Zhu Z-N. Different dosage regimens of nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine for the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hypertens Pregnancy 2022;41:126–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641955.2022.2056196 972. Halvorsen S, Mehilli J, Cassese S, Hall TS, Abdelhamid M, Barbato E, et al. 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3826–924. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac270 973. Lizano-Díez I, Poteet S, Burniol-Garcia A, Cerezales M. The burden of perioperative hypertension/hypotension: a systematic review. PLoS One 2022;17:e0263737. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263737 974. Futier E, Lefrant JY, Guinot PG, Godet T, Lorne E, Cuvillon P, et al. Effect of individualized vs standard blood pressure management strategies on postoperative organ dysfunction among high-risk patients undergoing major surgery: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017;318:1346–57. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.14172 975. Sanders RD, Hughes F, Shaw A, Thompson A, Bader A, Hoeft A, et al. Perioperative quality initiative consensus statement on preoperative blood pressure, risk and outcomes for elective surgery. Br J Anaesth 2019;122:552–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. bja.2019.01.018 976. Messina A, Robba C, Calabrò L, Zambelli D, Iannuzzi F, Molinari E, et al. Association between perioperative fluid administration and postoperative outcomes: a 20-year systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomized goal-directed trials in major visceral/noncardiac surgery. Crit Care 2021;25:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021- 03464-1 977. Meng L, Yu W, Wang T, Zhang L, Heerdt PM, Gelb AW. Blood pressure targets in perioperative care. Hypertension 2018;72:806–17. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha. 118.11688 978. Wanner PM, Wulff DU, Djurdjevic M, Korte W, Schnider TW, Filipovic M. Targeting higher intraoperative blood pressures does not reduce adverse cardiovascular events following noncardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;78:1753–64. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jacc.2021.08.048 979. Blessberger H, Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Fawcett LJ, Domanovits H, Schlager O, et al. Perioperative beta-blockers for preventing surgery-related mortality and morbidity in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;9:CD013438. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013438 980. McGory ML, Maggard MA, Ko CY. A meta-analysis of perioperative beta blockade: what is the actual risk reduction? Surgery 2005;138:171–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. surg.2005.03.022 981. Kertai MD, Cooter M, Pollard RJ, Buhrman W, Aronson S, Mathew JP, et al. Is compliance with surgical care improvement project cardiac (SCIP-Card-2) measures for perioperative β-blockers associated with reduced incidence of mortality and cardiovascular-related critical quality indicators after noncardiac surgery? Anesth Analg 2018;126:1829–38. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002577 982. Roshanov PS, Rochwerg B, Patel A, Salehian O, Duceppe E, Belley-Côté EP, et al. Withholding versus continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers before noncardiac surgery: an analysis of the vascular events in noncardiac surgery patIents cOhort evaluatioN prospective cohort. Anesthesiology 2017;126:16–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0000000000001404 983. Shiffermiller JF, Monson BJ, Vokoun CW, Beachy MW, Smith MP, Sullivan JN, et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of preoperative angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition (PREOP-ACEI). J Hosp Med 2018;13:661–7. https://doi.org/10. 12788/jhm.3036 984. Hollmann C, Fernandes NL, Biccard BM. A systematic review of outcomes associated with withholding or continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers before noncardiac surgery. Anesth Analg 2018;127:678–87. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002837 985. Ackland GL, Patel A, Abbott TEF, Begum S, Dias P, Crane DR, et al. Discontinuation vs. continuation of renin–angiotensin system inhibition before non-cardiac surgery: the SPACE trial. Eur Heart J 2024;45:1146–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad716 986. McEvoy MD, Gupta R, Koepke EJ, Feldheiser A, Michard F, Levett D, et al. Perioperative quality initiative consensus statement on postoperative blood pressure, risk and outcomes for elective surgery. Br J Anaesth 2019;122:575–86. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.bja.2019.01.019 987. Ekman I, Swedberg K, Taft C, Lindseth A, Norberg A, Brink E, et al. Person-centered care—ready for prime time. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2011;10:248–51. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ejcnurse.2011.06.008 988. Krist AH, Tong ST, Aycock RA, Longo DR. Engaging patients in decision-making and behavior change to promote prevention. Stud Health Technol Inform 2017; 240:284–302. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-170826 989. Johnson RA, Huntley A, Hughes RA, Hughes RA, Cramer H, Turner KM, et al. Interventions to support shared decision making for hypertension: a systematic review of controlled studies. Health Expect 2018;21:1191–207. https://doi.org/10. 1111/hex.12826 990. Johnson RL, Roter D, Powe NR, Cooper LA. Patient race/ethnicity and quality of patient–physician communication during medical visits. Am J Public Health 2004;94: 2084–90. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.94.12.2084 991. Williams MV, Davis T, Parker RM, Weiss BD. The role of health literacy in patientphysician communication. Fam Med 2002;34:383–9. 992. Karmali KN, Persell SD, Perel P, Lloyd-Jones DM, Berendsen MA, Huffman MD. Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;3:CD006887. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006887.pub4 993. Ma C, Zhou Y, Zhou W, Huang C. Evaluation of the effect of motivational interviewing counselling on hypertension care. Patient Educ Couns 2014;95:231–7. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.pec.2014.01.011 994. Huang X, Xu N, Wang Y, Sun Y, Guo A. The effects of motivational interviewing on hypertension management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Patient Educ Couns 2023;112:107760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2023.107760
ESC Guidelines 4017
Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026
p.107
995. Glaser E, Richard C, Lussier MT. The impact of a patient web communication intervention on reaching treatment suggested guidelines for chronic diseases: a randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns 2017;100:2062–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec. 2017.05.022 996. Richard AA, Shea K. Delineation of self-care and associated concepts. J Nurs Scholarsh 2011;43:255–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2011.01404.x 997. Wilkinson A, Whitehead L. Evolution of the concept of self-care and implications for nurses: a literature review. Int J Nurs Stud 2009;46:1143–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijnurstu.2008.12.011 998. Bodenheimer T, Lorig K, Holman H, Grumbach K. Patient self-management of chronic disease in primary care. JAMA 2002;288:2469–75. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jama.288.19.2469 999. Barlow J, Wright C, Sheasby J, Turner A, Hainsworth J. Self-management approaches for people with chronic conditions: a review. Patient Educ Couns 2002;48:177–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00032-0 1000. Hallberg I, Ranerup A, Kjellgren K. Supporting the self-management of hypertension: patients’ experiences of using a mobile phone-based system. J Hum Hypertens 2016; 30:141–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2015.37 1001. Almeida GO, Aidar FJ, Matos DG, Almeida-Neto PF, Melo EV, Barreto Filho JAS, et al. Non-targeted self-measurement of blood pressure: association with self-medication, unscheduled emergency visits and anxiety. Medicina (Kaunas) 2021;57:75. https://doi. org/10.3390/medicina57010075 1002. Greaves F, Joshi I, Campbell M, Roberts S, Patel N, Powell J, et al. What is an appropriate level of evidence for a digital health intervention? Lancet 2019;392:2665–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)33129-5 1003. Morton K, Dennison L, May C, Murray E, Little P, McManus RJ, et al. Using digital interventions for self-management of chronic physical health conditions: a meta-ethnography review of published studies. Patient Educ Couns 2017;100: 616–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.019 1004. McKinstry B, Hanley J, Wild S, Pagliari C, Paterson M, Lewis S, et al. Telemonitoring based service redesign for the management of uncontrolled hypertension: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2013;346:f3030. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3030 1005. Persell SD, Peprah YA, Lipiszko D, Lee JY, Li JJ, Ciolino JD, et al. Effect of home blood pressure monitoring via a smartphone hypertension coaching application or tracking application on adults with uncontrolled hypertension: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e200255. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2020.0255 1006. Andersson U, Nilsson PM, Kjellgren K, Hoffmann M, Wennersten A, Midlöv P, et al. PERson-centredness in Hypertension management using Information Technology: a randomized controlled trial in primary care. J Hypertens 2023;41:246–53. https://doi. org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003322 1007. Bergland OU, Halvorsen LV, Søraas CL, Hjørnholm U, Kjær VN, Rognstad S, et al. Detection of nonadherence to antihypertensive treatment by measurements of serum drug concentrations. Hypertension 2021;78:617–28. https://doi.org/10.1161/ hypertensionaha.121.17514 1008. Durand H, Hayes P, Morrissey EC, Newell J, Casey M, Murphy AW, et al. Medication adherence among patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 2017;35:2346–57. https://doi.org/ 10.1097/hjh.0000000000001502 1009. Kronish IM, Thorpe CT, Voils CI. Measuring the multiple domains of medication nonadherence: findings from a Delphi survey of adherence experts. Transl Behav Med 2021;11:104–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibz133 1010. DiMatteo MR. Social support and patient adherence to medical treatment: a meta-analysis. Health Psychol 2004;23:207–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278- 6133.23.2.207 1011. Houle SK, Chatterley T, Tsuyuki RT. Multidisciplinary approaches to the management of high blood pressure. Curr Opin Cardiol 2014;29:344–53. https://doi.org/10.1097/ hco.0000000000000071 1012. Woodham NS, Taneepanichskul S, Somrongthong R, Kitsanapun A, Sompakdee B. Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary approach intervention to improve blood pressure control among elderly hypertensive patients in rural Thailand: a quasi-experimental study. J Multidiscip Healthc 2020;13:571–80. https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.S254286 1013. Mattei da Silva ÂT, de Fátima Mantovani M, Castanho Moreira R, Perez Arthur J, Molina de Souza R. Nursing case management for people with hypertension in primary health care: a randomized controlled trial. Res Nurs Health 2020;43:68–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21994 1014. He J, Ouyang N, Guo X, Sun G, Li Z, Mu J, et al. Effectiveness of a non-physician community health-care provider-led intensive blood pressure intervention versus usual care on cardiovascular disease (CRHCP): an open-label, blinded-endpoint, cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2023;401:928–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0140-6736(22)02603-4 1015. Creegan D, McEvoy JW. Selected highlights in the updated treatment of hypertension. Trends Cardiovasc Med https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcm.2023.11.001 1016. Jaffe MG, Lee GA, Young JD, Sidney S, Go AS. Improved blood pressure control associated with a large-scale hypertension program. JAMA 2013;310:699–705. https:// doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.108769 1017. Hänsel M, Steigmiller K, Luft AR, Gebhard C, Held U, Wegener S, et al. Neurovascular disease in Switzerland: 10-year trends show non-traditional risk factors on the rise and higher exposure in women. Eur J Neurol 2022;29:2851–60. https://doi.org/10. 1111/ene.15434 1018. de Ruiter SC, Schmidt AF, Grobbee DE, den Ruijter HM, Peters SAE. Sex-specific Mendelian randomisation to assess the causality of sex differences in the effects of risk factors and treatment: spotlight on hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 2023;37: 602–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-023-00821-1 1019. Chapman N, Ching SM, Konradi AO, Nuyt AM, Khan T, Twumasi-Ankrah B, et al. Arterial hypertension in women: state of the art and knowledge gaps. Hypertension 2023;80:1140–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.122.20448 1020. Tamargo J, Caballero R, Mosquera ED. Sex and gender differences in the treatment of arterial hypertension. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2023;16:329–47. https://doi.org/10. 1080/17512433.2023.2189585 1021. Olsen MH, Angell SY, Asma S, Boutouyrie P, Burger D, Chirinos JA, et al. A call to action and a lifecourse strategy to address the global burden of raised blood pressure on current and future generations: the Lancet Commission on hypertension. Lancet 2016;388:2665–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31134-5 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/45/38/3912/7741010 by guest on 07 October 2026