Open access
Open access
Powered by Google Translator Translator

Review: Comparative Analysis of ESC and ESH Hypertension Guidelines

20 Nov, 2024 | 15:03h | UTC

Introduction: Hypertension remains a significant global health challenge with increasing prevalence and substantial morbidity and mortality rates. To address this, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) have independently published updated guidelines on hypertension management. This review provides a pragmatic comparison of these guidelines, highlighting their major similarities and differences to assist clinicians in optimizing patient care.

Key Recommendations:

Shared Recommendations:

  1. Diagnosis Criteria: Both guidelines recommend diagnosing hypertension based on office systolic and diastolic blood pressures of ≥140/90 mmHg.
  2. Blood Pressure Targets: Both advocate aiming for an optimal blood pressure of <130/80 mmHg. The ESH emphasizes personalized targets for specific populations like the elderly, while the ESC adopts the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle.
  3. Out-of-Office Measurements: Emphasis is placed on home blood pressure monitoring and ambulatory measurements to confirm diagnoses and tailor treatments.
  4. Comprehensive Assessment: Both recommend thorough initial evaluations, including screening for orthostatic hypotension, comorbidities, and hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD).
  5. Early Treatment Initiation: Both suggest starting antihypertensive therapy promptly, preferably using a single-pill combination of two agents after lifestyle interventions.
  6. Treatment Goals and Follow-Up: Both aim for patients to reach blood pressure targets within three months, underscoring the importance of close monitoring.
  7. Adjunctive Therapies: The use of SGLT-2 inhibitors is recommended for patients with chronic kidney disease and/or heart failure. Renal denervation is considered for true resistant hypertension.

Differences:

  1. Blood Pressure Classification: The ESC introduces a new category of “elevated blood pressure,” altering patient classification but with minimal impact on practical management.
  2. Screening for Secondary Hypertension: The ESC strongly encourages screening for secondary hypertension, particularly primary aldosteronism; the ESH does not emphasize this as strongly.
  3. Age Stratification: Different age thresholds for the very elderly are used (ESH: ≥80 years; ESC: ≥85 years), with the ESH providing more detailed treatment personalization for this group.
  4. Treatment Targets Philosophy: The ESC supports the ALARA principle for blood pressure targets, aiming for the lowest achievable levels without adverse effects, while the ESH provides specific target ranges.
  5. Beta-Blocker Use: The ESH includes beta-blockers as first-line therapy options, whereas the ESC positions them as third-line agents.

Conclusion: Despite minor discrepancies, the ESC and ESH hypertension guidelines are largely concordant and based on the same evidence base. Both sets provide clear, pragmatic recommendations emphasizing early diagnosis, personalized treatment, and close follow-up. Clinicians can confidently use either guideline to inform practice, as both aim to improve patient outcomes by effectively managing hypertension in the primary care setting.

Reference: Virdis A, et al. Juxtaposing Hypertension Guidelines: Are They Different? A Pragmatic Look to ESC and ESH Guidelines on (Arterial) Hypertension. High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention. 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-024-00693-7

 


Stay Updated in Your Specialty

Telegram Channels
Free

WhatsApp alerts 10-day free trial

No spam, just news.