The rapidly increasing burden of hypertension is responsible for premature deaths from cardiovascular disease (CVD), renal disease, and stroke, with a tremendous public health and financial burden. Hypertension detection, treatment, and control vary worldwide; it is still low, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). High blood pressure (BP) and CVD risk have a strong, linear, and independent association. They contribute to alarming numbers of all-cause and CVD deaths. A major culprit for increased hypertension is sympathetic activity, and further complications of hypertension are heart failure, ischemic heart disease (IHD), stroke, and renal failure. Now, antihypertensive interventions have emerged as a global public health priority to reduce BP-related morbidity and mortality. Calcium channel blockers (CCB) are highly effective vasodilators. and the most common drugs used for managing hypertension and CVD. Cilnidipine, with both L- and N-type calcium channel blocking activity, is a promising 4th generation CCB. It causes vasodilation via L-type calcium channel blockade and inhibits the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) via N-type calcium channel blockade. Cilnidipine, which acts as a dual L/N-type CCB, is linked to a reduced occurrence of pedal edema compared to amlodipine, which solely blocks L-type calcium channels. The antihypertensive properties of cilnidipine are very substantial, with low BP variability and long-acting properties. It is beneficial for hypertensive patients to deal with morning hypertension and for patients with abnormal nocturnal BP due to exaggerated sympathetic nerve activation. Besides its BP-lowering effect, it also exhibits organ protection via sympathetic nerve inhibition and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition; it controls heart rate and proteinuria. Reno-protective, neuroprotective, and cardioprotective effects of cilnidipine have been well-documented and demonstrated.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the use of antihypertensives changed in 2014 and 2017. To understand the effect of these guidelines, we examined trends in antihypertensive prescriptions in the United States from 2010 to 2019 using a repeated cross-sectional design.
RESULTS: Using electronic health records from 15 health care institutions for adults (20-85 years old) who had ≥1 antihypertensive prescription, we assessed whether (1) prescriptions of beta blockers decreased after the 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8) report discouraged use for first-line treatment, (2) prescriptions for calcium channel blockers and thiazide diuretics increased among Black patients after the JNC 8 report encouraged use as first-line therapy, and (3) prescriptions for dual therapy and fixed-dose combination among patients with blood pressure ≥140/90 mm Hg increased after recommendations in the 2017 Hypertension Clinical Practice Guidelines. The study included 1 074 314 patients with 2 133 158 prescription episodes. After publication of the JNC 8 report, prescriptions for beta blockers decreased (3% lower in 2018-2019 compared to 2010-2014), and calcium channel blockers increased among Black patients (20% higher in 2015-2017 and 41% higher in 2018-2019, compared to 2010-2014), in accordance with guideline recommendations. However, contrary to guidelines, dual therapy and fixed-dose combination decreased after publication of the 2017 Hypertension Clinical Practice Guidelines (9% and 11% decrease in 2018-2019 for dual therapy and fixed-dose combination, respectively, compared to 2015-2017), and thiazide diuretics decreased among Black patients after the JNC 8 report (6% lower in 2018-2019 compared to 2010-2014).
CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to guidelines on prescribing antihypertensive medication was inconsistent, presenting an opportunity for interventions to achieve better blood pressure control in the US population.

Originally, the beta-blockers were equally ranked alongside the other antihypertensive drug classes. Things changed when two major long-term randomized controlled trials, ASCOT-BPLA and LIFE showed that the patients receiving the beta-blockers based regimes suffered 25-30% more strokes than those receiving a calcium channel blocker based regime or an angiotensin receptor blocker based regime. The inferiority of the beta-blockers at stroke prevention was not due to differences in blood pressure control during the follow-up period in both trials. The 2023 European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guidelines still argue in favour of beta-blockers that their clinical inferiority was simply to lesser blood pressure reduction rather than class effect. The analysis argues that the return of beta-blockers as a first-line option for the management of uncomplicated hypertension by the ESH is a cause for concern and should be reconsidered.

The benefits of improved clinical outcomes through blood pressure (BP) reduction have been proven in multiple clinical trials and meta-analyses. The new (2023) guideline from the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) includes β-blockers within five main classes of antihypertensive agents suitable for initiation of antihypertensive pharmacotherapy and for combination with other antihypertensive agents. This is in contrast to the 2018 edition of ESH guidelines that recommended β-blockers for use primarily in patients with compelling indications such as cardiovascular comorbidities, e.g. coronary heart disease, heart failure. This change was based on the fact that the magnitude of BP reduction is the most important factor for adverse cardiovascular outcomes, over and above the precise manner in which reduced BP is achieved. The ESH guideline also supports the use of β-blockers for patients with resting heart rate (>80 bpm); high resting heart rate is a sign of sympathetic overactivity, an important driver of adverse cardiac remodelling in the setting of hypertension and heart failure. Hypertension management guidelines support for the use of combination therapies for almost all patients with hypertension, ideally within a single-pill combination to optimise adherence to therapy. Where a β-blocker is prescribed, the inclusion of a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker within a combination regimen is rational. These agents together reduce both peripheral and central BP, which epidemiological studies have shown is important for reducing the burden of premature morbidity and mortality associated with uncontrolled hypertension, especially strokes.

We address the reasons why, unlike other guidelines, in the 2023 guidelines of the European Society of Hypertension β-blockers (BBs) have been regarded as major drugs for the treatment of hypertension, at the same level as diuretics, calcium channel blockers, and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. We argue that BBs, (1) reduce blood pressure (the main factor responsible for treatment-related protection) not less than other drugs, (2) reduce pooled cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in placebo-controlled trials, in which there has also been a sizeable reduction of all major cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes, (3) have been associated with a lower global cardiovascular protection in 2 but not in several other comparison trials, in which the protective effect of BBs versus the other major drugs has been similar or even greater, with a slightly smaller or no difference of global benefit in large trial meta-analyses and a similar protective effect when comparisons extend to BBs in combination versus other drug combinations. We mention the large number of cardiac and other comorbidities for which BBs are elective drugs, and we express criticism against the exclusion of BBs because of their lower protective effect against stroke in comparison trials, because, for still uncertain reasons, differences in protection against cause-specific events (stroke, heart failure, and coronary disease) have been reported for other major drugs. These partial data cannot replace global benefits as the main deciding factor for drug choice, also because in the general hypertensive population whether and which type of event might occur is unknown.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension control is suboptimal globally. Implementing evidence-based, simple, standardized treatment protocols (STPs) has been instrumental in effectively and efficiently improving treatment and control of hypertension. We aimed to identify, characterize, and critically appraise hypertension STPs.
METHODS: We defined STP as a series of steps for the pharmacological treatment of primary hypertension, with information on target population, BP threshold for treatment initiation, target BP, specific drugs/classes/doses, and follow-up frequency. STPs for adult patients were identified from the websites of relevant health organizations, Google search, and through expert consultations (until July 2023). STPs for secondary, gestational, or malignant hypertension or those that were templates/samples were excluded. Included STPs were critically appraised using HEARTS in the Americas Checklist for hypertension management in primary care and compared with the 2021 WHO hypertension management guideline recommendations.
RESULTS: Fifty STPs were identified. All STPs had a stepwise treatment approach, involved guideline-recommended first-line drugs, and 98% consisted of at least four steps. Majority (54%) recommended monotherapy with calcium channel blockers as first-line treatment. Only 44% STPs recommended treatment initiation with combination therapy, and 16% recommended single-pill combinations. Most (62%) had dose-intensification as the second step. Most (74%) STPs did not provide complete dosing information. Only one STP mentioned a target time for achieving BP control. On average, STPs scored a performance of 68% on the HEARTS Checklist.
CONCLUSIONS: Several STPs are available globally; however, most of them have enormous scope for improvement through interventions aimed at alignment with the latest evidence-based guidelines and multistakeholder engagement.

The neurointensive care management of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is one of the most critical components contributing to short-term and long-term patient outcomes. Previous recommendations for the medical management of aSAH comprehensively summarized the evidence based on consensus conference held in 2011. In this report, we provide updated recommendations based on appraisal of the literature using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.
The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome (PICO) questions relevant to the medical management of aSAH were prioritized by consensus from the panel members. The panel used a custom-designed survey instrument to prioritize clinically relevant outcomes specific to each PICO question. To be included, the study design qualifying criteria were as follows: prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or retrospective observational studies, case-control studies, case series with a sample larger than 20 patients, meta-analyses, restricted to human study participants. Panel members first screened titles and abstracts, and subsequently full text review of selected reports. Data were abstracted in duplicate from reports meeting inclusion criteria. Panelists used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Risk of Bias tool for assessment of RCTs and the \"Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions\" tool for assessment of observational studies. The summary of the evidence for each PICO was presented to the full panel, and then the panel voted on the recommendations.
The initial search retrieved 15,107 unique publications, and 74 were included for data abstraction. Several RCTs were conducted to test pharmacological interventions, and we found that the quality of evidence for nonpharmacological questions was consistently poor. Five PICO questions were supported by strong recommendations, one PICO question was supported by conditional recommendations, and six PICO questions did not have sufficient evidence to provide a recommendation.
These guidelines provide recommendations for or against interventions proven to be effective, ineffective, or harmful in the medical management of patients with aSAH based on a rigorous review of the available literature. They also serve to highlight gaps in knowledge that should guide future research priorities. Despite improvements in the outcomes of patients with aSAH over time, many important clinical questions remain unanswered.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is defined as an elevated mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of >20 mmHg together with a pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PAWP) of ≤15 mmHg and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) of>2 Wood units (WU). Although the total mortality of pregnant women with PAH has decreased significantly in recent years and is reported to be around 12% in some databases, total mortality is still at an unacceptably high percentage. Moreover, some subgroups, such as patients with Eisenmenger\'s syndrome, have a particularly high mortality rate of up to 36%. Pregnancy in patients with PAH is contraindicated; its appearance is an indication for a planned termination. Education of patients with PAH, including counseling on effective contraception, is essential. During pregnancy, blood volume, heart rate, and cardiac output increase, while PVR and systemic vascular resistance decrease. The hemostatic balance is shifted towards hypercoagulability. Among PAH-specific drugs, the use of inhaled or intravenous prostacyclins, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers (in patients with preserved vasoreactivity) is acceptable. Endothelin receptor antagonists and riociguat are contraindicated. Childbirth can take place through either vaginal delivery or caesarean section; similarly, neuraxial and general anesthesia have proven indications. In a situation where all pharmacological options have been used in pregnant or postpartum patients in a serious condition, veno-arterial ECMO is a useful therapeutic option. For PAH patients who want to become mothers, an option that does not endanger their lives is adoption.

The Brazilian Headache Society (Sociedade Brasileira de Cefaleia, SBCe, in Portuguese) nominated a Committee of Authors with the aim of establishing a consensus with recommendations regarding prophylactic treatment for episodic migraine based on articles published in the worldwide literature, as well as personal experience. Migraine affects 1 billion people around the world and more than 30 million Brazilians. In addition, it is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disorder. It is well known within the medical community of neurologists, and especially among headache specialists, that there is a need to disseminate knowledge about prophylactic treatment for migraine. For this purpose, together with the need for drug updates and to expand knowledge of the disease itself (frequency, intensity, duration, impact and perhaps the progression of migraine), this Consensus was developed, following a full online methodology, by 12 groups who reviewed and wrote about the pharmacological categories of the drugs used and, at the end of the process, met to read and establish conclusions for this document. The drug classes studied were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) antibodies, beta-blockers, antihypertensives, calcium channel inhibitors, other antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, and dual-action antidepressants), other drugs, and polytherapy. Hormonal treatment and anti-inflammatories and triptans in minimum prophylaxis schemes (miniprophylaxis) will be covered in a specific chapter. The drug classes studied for part I of the Consensus were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-CGRP antibodies, and beta-blockers.
A Sociedade Brasileira de Cefaleia (SBCe) nomeou um Comitê de Autores com o objetivo de estabelecer um consenso com recomendações sobre o tratamento profilático da enxaqueca episódica com base em artigos da literatura mundial e da experiência pessoal. A enxaqueca é um distúrbio subdiagnosticado e subtratado que acomete um bilhão de pessoas no mundo e mais de 30 milhões de brasileiros. É conhecido na comunidade médica de neurologistas e, sobretudo, dos especialistas em cefaleia, a necessidade de se divulgar o conhecimento sobre o tratamento profilático da enxaqueca. Com esta finalidade, aliada às necessidades de atualizações de drogas e de se aumentar o conhecimento sobre a doença em si (frequência, intensidade, duração, impacto e talvez a progressão da enxaqueca), foi elaborado este Consenso, com metodologia totalmente on-line, por 12 grupos que revisaram e escreveram sobre as categorias farmacológicas das drogas e, ao final, reuniram-se para a leitura e conclusão do documento. As classes de drogas estudadas para este Consenso foram: anticonvulsivantes, antidepressivos tricíclicos, anticorpos monoclonais do antipeptídeo relacionado ao gene da calcitonina (peptídeo relacionado ao gene da calcitonina — anti-CGRP), betabloqueadores, anti-hipertensivos, inibidores dos canais de cálcio, outros antidepressivos (inibidores seletivos de recaptação de serotonina, ISRSs, e antidepressivos de ação dual), outras drogas, e politerapia. O tratamento hormonal, bem como anti-inflamatórios e triptanas em esquema de profilaxia mínima (miniprofilaxia), será abordado em um capítulo próprio. As classes de drogas estudadas na parte I do Consenso foram: anticonvulsivantes, antidepressivos tricíclicos, anticorpos monoclonais anti-CGRP, e betabloqueadores.

Cardiovascular conditions such as hypertension, arrhythmias, and heart failure are common in patients undergoing anesthesia for surgical or other procedures. Numerous guidelines from various specialty societies offer variable recommendations for the perioperative management of these medications. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified a need to provide multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for preoperative medication management. The society convened a group of 13 members with expertise in perioperative medicine and training in anesthesiology or internal medicine. The aim of this consensus effort is to provide perioperative clinicians with guidance on the management of cardiovascular medications commonly encountered during the preoperative evaluation. We used a modified Delphi process to establish consensus. Twenty-one classes of medications were identified: α-adrenergic receptor antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, β-adrenoceptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, centrally acting sympatholytic medications, direct-acting vasodilators, loop diuretics, thiazide diuretics, potassium-sparing diuretics, endothelin receptor antagonists, cardiac glycosides, nitrodilators, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, class III antiarrhythmic agents, potassium-channel openers, renin inhibitors, class I antiarrhythmic agents, sodium-channel blockers, and sodium glucose cotransportor-2 inhibitors. We provide recommendations for the management of these medications preoperatively.