Hypertension––At a Critical Crossroads?
Hypertension (HTN), through its high incidence, prevalence, and dire consequences, remains a major contributor to the global burden of disease. The noncommunicable disease burden now exceeds that of infectious disease even in the developing world, with precious few resources anywhere to manage this burgeoning challenge.1
Nevertheless, HTN control rates remain unacceptably low. Currently, approximately 73 million Americans have HTN, and blood pressure (BP) is controlled in only around 50% of the cases.2 Between 1988–1994 and 2007–2010, the prevalence of uncontrolled high BP declined for all age groups. However, in 2007–2010, nearly one half of adults with HTN continued to have uncontrolled high BP.3
Good, clear guidance about how to screen for, detect, and treat HTN is needed for patients, health‐care providers, insurance companies, public health bodies, agencies, and governments. The question we posed in 2014 was whether we have this guidance or whether the multiple overlapping and sometimes even contradictory statements recently issued do not in fact provide a perfect storm of confusion.
A Historic Perspective: Analyzing the JNC Reports
The first report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC) was published in 1977 and was based on rather limited and inconclusive (available in the mid‐1970s) clinical information from a modern point of view. Currently, a total of eight JNC reports have been issued. They are briefly summarized in Table 1.
Table 1.
| Year | JNC Report | Main Features |
|---|---|---|
| 1977 | JNC 1 |
No systolic blood pressure (SBP) in its classification system; Drug therapy was recommended for patients with diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥105 mm Hg; Therapy “could be considered” even for patients with DBP between 90 mm Hg and 104 mm Hg; First‐line medication: thiazide‐type diuretic |
| 1980 | JNC 2 |
No SBP in the new classification system; Introduced the terms “mild,” “moderate,” and “severe hypertension” |
| 1984 | JNC 3 |
Addressed SBP, only as isolated systolic hypertension (≥160 mm Hg) or borderline isolated systolic hypertension; The first report recognizing the terms “high normal” when SBP was <140 mm Hg and that these patients could be at “some risk”; β‐Blockers were added for first‐line medication |
| 1988 | JNC 4 | Added angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers as initial therapy options; |
| 1993 | JNC 5 |
SBP was included in a better‐defined classification system; The first report that established the “high‐risk” patient concept (for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease) |
| 1997 | JNC 6 |
Suggested that any of the seven types of antihypertensive drugs could be used for initial treatment; Reduced the number of BP stages from four to three; Settled the term “goal BP”; Introduced the term “compelling indication” |
| 2003 | JNC 7 |
Classification reduced the hypertension stages to two; Introduced the term “prehypertension” for patients with BP <140/90 mm Hg; Reduced the BP goal to ≤130/80 mm Hg; Treatment was stratified in accordance with target organ damage and high‐risk populations; Highlighted the importance of lifestyle changes; First‐line therapy recommendations were consistent with various types of populations with compelling indications |
The guidelines industry was founded, and then flourished, with departmental, hospital, regional, national (eg, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [NICE]), international‐local (eg, North America, Australia, Europe), and then fully international guidelines groups and bodies, all highly active in assembling evidence and then analyzing and disseminating care instructions. Furthermore, each medical condition had its own guidelines, eg, dyslipidemia, HTN, kidney disease, and diabetes. Little initial effort was expended on appreciating that many real‐life subjects often had more than one “risk factor” (eg, obesity, diabetes, HTN) and that the presence of these other comorbidities would likely affect therapeutic options and outcomes.
The Present Time
In contrast to the early JNC times, we are now experiencing an era of “too much information.” This is because in 2014 we were faced with six “guidance protocols,” essentially covering the same topic(s): detection and treatment of HTN. It is clear that these guidelines have different incentives (see below) and that they should give an exhaustive algorithm about how to treat HTN, but it is also clear that in some important areas there appears to be disagreement among these recommendations. The collision of these new recent guidelines has now made every clinical decision harder, so, the “new‐old ironclad” question remains: “What should we do?”
We now have to deal with the following guidelines, all at the same time:
European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC) 20136
American Society of Hypertension/International Society of Hypertension (ASH/ISH) 20137
Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8) 20138
Canadian Hypertension Education Program (CHEP) 20149
NICE 201110
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 201211
AHA/ACC/CDC) scientific advisory document from November 2013.12
To misquote by paraphrasing St Francis of Assisi “where there was certainty, let us now sow doubt.” A number of articles had been issued on this matter highlighting the most important discrepancies, particularly the increase in threshold BP value for initiation of pharmacologic therapy.13, 14, 15, 16
Indeed, as mentioned above, these guidelines were intended for different audiences and were written with different motivations. The ESH/ESC guideline evaluates all the relevant literature across the spectrum of HTN and provides concise recommendations that can be easily and rapidly consulted by physicians in their routine practice.6 ASH/ISH is a brief curriculum and set of recommendations that can be useful for all practitioners, not only for primary care physicians or medical students.7 CHEP is a national program that targets various health‐care professionals in clinical and community settings. Its standardized recommendations and clinical practice guidelines are updated annually and then translated and adapted into educational materials for patients and providers.9 NICE was composed primarily to address cost‐effectiveness issues in HTN.10
Although, or even because of this, it was based on a systematic review including only randomized controlled trials, the most controversial guideline in the current setting is clearly JNC 8.8 This is because of the major changes introduced that differentiate JNC 8 from JNC 7,17 specifically the introduction of an increase of the target systolic BP from 140 mm Hg to 150 mm Hg in patients 60 years and older without diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease (CKD). A minority of authors in the guideline development panel disagreed with this new systolic BP target.8, 18 Finally, a full 60% of recommendations were based on expert opinion, while just 10% were based on clinical trial evidence.
A Comparative Perspective of the Recent Guidelines
Following is a comparison of all of the recently published guidelines, underlining the key differences between the different guideline recommendations and focusing on two critical areas: first, the definition and classification of HTN, and, second, special considerations for patients with CKD (Figure).
Figure 1.
First‐line recommended medication in the general population without any compelling indications. HTN indicates hypertension; CCBs, calcium channel blockers; ACEI, angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BBs, β‐blockers.
HTN Definition, Classification, and BP Thresholds for Treatment Initiation and Goals
Apparently, three guidelines skipped this basic important step: JNC 8 and AHA/ACC/CDC did not provide a proper and clear threshold for HTN definition and JNC 8, AHA/ACC/CDC, and CHEP did not state a grade classification of HTN.8, 9, 12 In addition, the definition of “elderly” is different between the ASH/ISH, CHEP, and NICE guidelines (age ≥80 years) and the JNC 8 guideline (age ≥60 years), and the AHA/ACC/CDC guideline did not provide any definition or special guidance for the elderly patient.7, 10, 12 In addition to not presenting an adequate definition of the elderly, the ESH/ESC guideline exerts a confusing effect by referring to this category of patients both in terms of older than 65 years and 80 years and older.6 Also, the ASH/ISH guideline considers first‐line medication in patients stratified as younger than 60 years and 60 years and older.7 This is not a trivial issue since in the United States alone there are 7.4 million patients 60 years and older who could be included in a group with BP between 140/90 mm Hg and 149/90 mm Hg.15 For a schematic comparison between these guidelines, see Table 2 and 3.
Table 2.
Hypertension Definition, Classification, and BP Thresholds
| ESH/ESC 20136 | ASH/ISH 20137 | JNC 8 20138 | CHEP 20149 | NICE 201110 | AHA/ACC/CDC 201312 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hypertension definition | SBP >140 mm Hg and/or DBP >90 mm Hg | SBP ≥140 mm Hg or DBP ≥90 mm Hg or both on repeated examination | NS | SBP ≥140 mm Hg and/or DBP ≥90 mm Hg | BP ≥140/90 mm Hg + subsequent average daytime ABPM or average HBPM – BP ≥135/85 mm Hg | NS |
| Definition of “elderly” population | NS | 80 years | 60 years | 80 years | 80 years | NS |
| Threshold for starting treatment in the nonelderly general population |
SBP 140–159 mm Hg or DBP 90–99 mm Hg (grade 1 HTN) in patients at low to moderate risk (IIa, B) SBP 160–179 mm Hg or DBP 100–109 mm Hg (grade 2 HTN) and SBP ≥180 mm Hg or DBP ≥110 mm Hg (grade 3 HTN) in patients with any level of CV risk, a few weeks after or simultaneously with initiation of lifestyle changes (I, A) |
BP >140/90 mm Hg and lifestyle changes not effective BP ≥160/100 mm Hg (grade 2 HTN), drug treatment should be started immediately Drug treatment can be started immediately in all HTN patients in whom the practitioner believes it is necessary to achieve more rapid control of BP |
SBP ≥140 mm Hg, DBP ≥90 (expert opinion, grade E) |
SBP ≥160 mm Hg or DBP ≥100, in patients without macrovascular TOD or other CV risk factors (grade A) SBP ≥140 mm Hg and DBP ≥90 mm Hg, in patients with macrovascular target organ damage or other independent CV risk factors (grade A for DBP, grade C for SBP 140–160 mm Hg, grade A for SBP >160 mm Hg) |
BP ≥140/90 in patients with ≥1 of the following: TOD, CVD, CKD, DM, 10‐year CV risk ≥20% BP ≥160/100 mm Hg and subsequent average ABPM/HBPM ≥150/95 mm Hg For patients younger than 40 years and stage 1 hypertension with no evidence of TOD, CVD, renal disease, or DM, consider seeking specialist evaluation of secondary causes of hypertension and a more detailed assessment of potential TOD |
SBP 140–159 mm Hg or DBP 90–99 mm Hg |
Abbreviations: ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CV, cardiovascular; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; DM, diabetes mellitus; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HBPM, home blood pressure monitoring; HTN, hypertension; NS, no statement; SBP, systolic blood pressure; TOD, target organ damage. For ESH/ESC guidelines, the class of recommendation and level of evidence are stated in parentheses. For JNC 8 guidelines, the strength of recommendation and its grade are stated in parentheses.
Table 3.
BP Goals According to Guidelines
| ESH/ESC 20136 | ASH/ISH 20137 | JNC 8 20138 | CHEP 20149 | NICE 201110 | AHA/ACC/CDC 201312 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BP goal in the elderly – general population |
In fit elderly patients younger than 80 years: SBP <140 mm Hg if treatment is well tolerated (IIb, C) In patients 80 years and older: SBP between 150 mm Hg and 140 mm Hg, if they are in good physical and mental condition (I, B) |
For most patients: BP <140/90 mm Hg In patients 80 years and older: BP <150/90 mm Hg who do not have CKD or DM; (in case of DM or CKD, BP <140/90 mm Hg can be considered) |
SBP <150 mm Hg DBP <90 mm Hg (strong recommendation, grade A) |
For patients 80 years and older who do not have DM or TOD: SBP <150 mm Hg (grade C) |
For patients younger than 80 years: BP <140/90 mm Hg For patients 80 years and older: BP <150/90 mm Hg |
BP ≤139/89 mm Hg |
| BP goal in patients with DM |
SBP goal <140 mm Hg (I, A) DBP goal <85 mm Hg (I, A) |
BP <140/90 mm Hg |
SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg (expert opinion, grade E) |
SBP <130 mm Hg (grade C) and DBP <80 mm Hg (grade A) | NS | NS, but a BP <140/90 mm Hg could be considered |
| BP goal for patients with predialysis CKD |
<140 mm Hg should be considered (IIa, B) When overt proteinuria is present, SBP values <130 mm Hg may be considered, provided that changes in eGFR are monitored (IIb, B) |
BP <140/90 mm Hg |
SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg (expert opinion, grade E) |
BP <140/90 mm Hg (grade A) | NS | NS, but a BP <140/90 mm Hg could be considered |
Abbreviations: BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; DM, diabetes mellitus; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; NS, no statement; SBP, systolic blood pressure; TOD, target organ damage. For the ESH/ESC guidelines, the class of recommendation and the level of evidence are stated in parentheses; For the JNC 8 guidelines, the strength of recommendation and its grade are stated in parentheses.
ASH/ACC, JNC 8, and NICE made special considerations for non‐black and black populations, ESH/ESC, CHEP, and AHA/ACC/CDC failed to include black patients in their recommendations.6, 7, 8, 9, 12 We acknowledge the lack of recommendations regarding other populations, such as Asian and Hispanic patients. For example, Asian patients, especially those with CKD, are more likely to develop end‐stage renal disease than cardiovascular death compared with Caucasian patients,19 so that BP threshold and goal and first‐line therapy might be different in order to prevent the most significant outcomes. New HTN guidelines have been developed in Asian20 and Hispanic21 areas, but the complete analysis of all available regional guidelines, frequently based on limited scientific data, is beyond the scope of this article.
Special Focus on Renal Patients
Since patients with CKD are at high risk for developing CVD with increasing risk of cardiovascular mortality, adequate BP control could translate into immense benefit.22 However, the following crucial question naturally emerges from the beginning: what is the BP treatment threshold value and what is the BP treatment goal value in these patients?
Not all of the guidelines specifically address patients with CKD, in contrast to the interest shown to other high‐risk and prevalent populations (those with diabetes and stroke). The most explicit in this regard is KDIGO.11 The KDIGO guidelines stratify therapeutic strategies according to urine albumin excretion: when this value is <30 mg/24 h, the guidelines recommend a systolic BP (SBP) threshold of >140 mm Hg and a diastolic BP (DBP) of >90 mm Hg, and when the value is between 30 mg/24 h and 300 mg/24 h or ≥300 mg/24 h, the guidelines recommend an SBP threshold of >130 mm Hg and DBP >80 mm Hg.11 In addition, in terms of BP treatment goal value, KDIGO uses the same classification system: when the urine albumin excretion is <30 mg/24 h, the SBP target is ≤140 mm Hg and the DBP is ≤90 mm Hg, and when it is between 30 mg/24 h and 300 mg/24 h or >300 mg/24 h, the SBP target is ≤130 mm Hg and the DBP is ≤80 mm Hg.11 For initial choice of drug, this protocol recommends, regardless of urine albumin excretion, an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or angiotensin‐converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor.11
The ESH/ESC guidelines recommend that an SBP goal of <140 mm Hg should be considered, except in the case of proteinuria, in which the goal could be reduced to <130 mm Hg. For first‐line medication, the protocol suggests that renin‐angiotensin system blockers may be more effective than other antihypertensive drugs in reducing albuminuria. They also state that in case of a CKD patient with isolated systolic HTN, a calcium channel blocker might be preferred.6
ASH/ISH settled for a BP goal of <140/90 mm Hg, considering the lack of evidence for a specific target value. However, the authors considered this is an important modification, because, until now, the BP goal for these patients was <130/80 mm Hg. In the presence of albuminuria, a lowered BP goal could be considered (<130/80 mm Hg). In terms of threshold BP value, the guidelines consider that, in elderly patients with CKD, the limit should be lowered to ≥140/90 mm Hg for initiation of treatment, in opposite to BP ≥150/90 mm Hg, settled in the general elderly population. For first‐line therapeutic intervention, the guidelines recommend an ARB or ACE inhibitor.7
JNC 8 established an SBP goal of <140 mm Hg and a DBP goal of <90 mm Hg for hypertensive CKD patients. They recommend the initiation of treatment with an ACE inhibitor or ARB, regardless of diabetes status.8
The AHA/ACC/CDC guidelines are not specific in determining a precise value for BP treatment goal in CKD patients; nevertheless, the BP goal of <140/90 mm Hg is appropriate. The guidelines do not provide a clear, evidence‐based statement for pharmacologic intervention but suggest that ACE inhibitors or ARBs should be considered for hypertensive patients with CKD.12
The CHEP guidelines recommend, in the presence of nondiabetic CKD with proteinuria (defined as urinary protein >500 mg/24 h or albumin to creatinine ratio >30 mg/mmol) that initial therapy should be started with an ACE inhibitor or an ARB if an ACE inhibitor is not well tolerated, aiming for a BP target of <140/90 mm Hg. The protocol considers diuretics as an additive therapy (and loop diuretics for patients with CKD and volume overload).9
The 2011 NICE HTN guidelines assert that hypertensive patients younger than 80 years receive medication starting with grade 1 HTN if they have renal disease. They do not offer a first‐line agent for treatment.10 Since there are no particular endorsements in the latest NICE HTN guidelines, we refer to recommendations made by the NICE CKD guidelines issued in 2008: “In people with CKD aim to keep the systolic BP below 140 mm Hg (target range 120–139 mm Hg) and the diastolic BP below 90 mm Hg.”23
Finally, what about renal patients who are receiving renal replacement therapy (CKD‐5D)? This is an extremely complicated and challenging question, given the fact that specific BP targets derived from randomized controlled trials are lacking.24 The prevalence of HTN in patients undergoing dialysis is about 90% and is associated with an annual mortality rate of 23%, primarily from CV complications.25 Therefore, achieving optimal BP control in patients on dialysis is of major importance. The National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative guidelines suggest that pre‐hemodialysis and post‐hemodialysis BP should be 140/90 mm Hg and 130/80 mm Hg, respectively, but these targets were mainly based only on the expert judgment of the working group, applying weak evidence.24 BP in the CKD‐5D population is multifactorial, determined by the interconnection between the renin‐angiotensin system and sympathetic nervous system, fluid volume and sodium load, postdialysis target weight, dialysate composition, and arterial stiffness.24 This “complex brew” requires a strict individualization of BP targets and therapy regimen. The BP ranges associated with the minimal risk related to self‐measured home BP monitoring (the “between‐dialysis sessions control of BP”) are currently not known in CKD stage 5D patients. In the only study published so far on the topic, the best outcome was observed with a self‐measured home SBP range between 120 mm Hg and 145 mm Hg.24
Conclusions
The main conclusion that emerges from these several detailed comparisons is actually quite simple and touches the very definition of a guideline. Health‐care providers should always remember that these protocols are here merely to provide guidance and they should certainly not be considered as a set of abiding laws. A clinician's discernment about his individual patient must be superior to the recommendations of a committee that has not seen that specific patient and has not evaluated the individual's overall state of health, comorbidities, or needs and priorities (and indeed, the needs and priorities of the country and region of medical practice). The doctor should follow the appropriate BP treatment goal, stratified accordingly to specific risk factors and distinct features for each patient in particular, establishing and dealing with identifiable causes of HTN.
We also need to suggest a world body agreement statement to reconcile the major confusion currently felt by practicing physicians, carriers, patients, payers, and all other concerned parties. Therefore, an international consensus conference that will include physicians, bioethicists, and medical economists from various countries should be established in order to institute a universal and integrated guideline for HTN management. Undoubtedly, the medical delegate committee should include not only cardiologists but also nephrologists, neurologists, primary care physicians, and diabetes specialists with extensive clinical and methodological experience. Broadly, the meeting should cover interactive discussions on the existing sets of guidelines and their differences, the evidence‐based search strategy and a detailed review of all available literature, and a unanimous settlement on a personalized optimal approach for clinical decision‐making according to various subgroups of population. Separate processing groups should effectively achieve in the end a final international consensus.
Sources of Funding
None.
References
- 1. Department of Economic and Social Affairs . Office for ECOSOC Support and Coordination. Achieving the Global Public Health Agenda. United Nations New York: Dialogues at the Economic and Social Council; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Heron M. Deaths: leading causes for 2006. National Vital Statistics Report. 58, 2010. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. National Center for Health Statics . Health, United States, 2012: with Special Feature on Emergency Care. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statics; 2013. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Izzo JL, Black HR, Taubert KA. Hypertension Primer: The Essentials of High Blood Pressure. Dallas, TX: American Heart Association; 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 5. Pogue VA, Ellis C, Michel J, Francis CK. New staging system of the fifth Joint National Committee report on the detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure (JNC‐V) alters assessment of the severity and treatment of hypertension. Hypertension. 1996;28:713–718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, et al. Task Force Members . 2013 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). J Hypertens. 2013;31:1281–1357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Weber MA, Schiffrin EL, White WB, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in the community: a statement by the American Society of Hypertension and the International Society of Hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2014;16:14–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, et al. 2014 evidence‐based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA. 2014;311:507–520. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Canadian Hypertension Education Program (CHEP) . 2014. Recommendations. http://www.hypertension.ca/resources
- 10. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence . Guidance: Hypertension: The Clinical Management of Primary Hypertension in Adults: Update of Clinical Guidelines 18 and 34. London: Royal College of Physicians (UK); 2011. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Blood Pressure Work Group . KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the management of blood pressure in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. Suppl. 2012;2:337–414. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Go AS, Bauman MA, Coleman King SM, et al. American Heart Association ; American College of Cardiology ; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . An effective approach to high blood pressure control: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hypertension. 2014;63:878–885. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Bauchner H, Fontanarosa PB, Golub RM. Updated guidelines for management of high blood pressure: recommendations, review, and responsibility. JAMA. 2014;311:477–478. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Sox HC. Assessing the trustworthiness of the guideline for management of high blood pressure in adults. JAMA. 2014;311:472–474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Kolata G.: Hypertension Guide May Affect 7.4 Million. The New York Times. December 19, 2013.
- 16. Wood S. ASH/ISH Issue Separate Hypertension Guidelines From JNC 8, Hinting at Discord. Medscape. Dec 19, 2013.
- 17. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure ; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee . The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289:2560–2572. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Wright JT Jr, Fine LJ, Lackland DT, et al. Evidence supporting a systolic blood pressure goal of less than 150 mm Hg in patients aged 60 years or older: the minority view. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:499–503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Chiu YL, Chien KL, Lin SL, et al. Outcomes of stage 3–5 chronic kidney disease before end‐stage renal disease at a single center in Taiwan. Nephron Clin Pract. 2008;109:c109–c118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Shimamoto K, Ando K, Fujita T, et al. Japanese Society of Hypertension Committee for Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension . The Japanese society of hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension (JSH 2014). Hypertens Res. 2014;37:253–387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia ; Sociedade Brasileira de Hipertensão ; Sociedade Brasileira de Nefrologia . VI Brazilian guidelines on hypertension. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2010;1(Suppl):1–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Jha V, Garcia‐Garcia G, Iseki K, et al. Chronic kidney disease: global dimension and perspectives. Lancet. 2013;382:260–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence . Chronic Kidney Disease. Early Identification and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease in Adults in Primary and Secondary Care. Clinical guideline CG73. London: NICE, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Levin NW, Kotanko P, Eckardt KU, et al. Blood pressure in chronic kidney disease stage 5D‐report from a kidney disease: improving global outcomes controversies conference. Kidney Int. 2010;77:273–284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Singapuri MS, Lea JM. Management of hypertension in the end‐stage renal disease patient. JCOM. 2010;17:87–95. [Google Scholar]