Current Diabetes Reports

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 199–205

Management of hypertension in the cardiometabolic syndrome and diabetes

  • Nitin Khosla
  • Peter Hart
  • George L. Bakris


This article reviews the goals of antihypertensive therapy in patients with the cardiometabolic syndrome, as well as diabetes in the context of reducing progression of kidney disease and decreasing cardiovascular (CV) mortality. All published guidelines recommend a blood pressure (BP) goal of less than 130/80 mm Hg in people with diabetes. To achieve this BP, an average of three different antihypertensive agents, appropriately dosed, are needed. Initial therapy includes an inhibitor of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system usually coupled with a thiazide diuretic. β Blockers are often employed to both lower BP and reduce overall CV risk; however, nondihydropyridine calcium antagonists are comparable in benefit without the adverse metabolic effects. Changing lifestyle patterns to include exercise and proper diet, achieving target BP and lipid goals, and treating with an aspirin daily reduces the absolute risk of a CV event by 20% over less intensive treatment. Thus, treating the cardiometabolic syndrome requires an aggressive approach with a focus on both lifestyle modification and pharmacologic intervention.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    National Kidney Foundation: K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis 2002, 39:S1-S266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al.: Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003, 42:1206–1252. Reviews the latest guidelines for treating BP, in the context of CV and renal risk reduction.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Summary of Revisions for the 2003 Clinical Practice Recommendations [no authors listed]. Diabetes Care 2003, 26:S3.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, et al.: 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, 360:1903–1913. Discusses risk of CV events in the context of BP level at ages 40 to 89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gaede P, Vedel P, Larsen N, et al.: Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:383–393. Intervention study that clearly shows that following guideline recommendations leads to far better outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coresh J, Wei GL, McQuillan G, et al.: Prevalence of high blood pressure and elevated serum creatinine level in the United States: findings from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988–1994). Arch Intern Med 2001, 161:1207–1216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patel RP, Taylor SD: Factors affecting medication adherence in hypertensive patients. Ann Pharmacother 2002, 36:40–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bakris GL, Williams M, Dworkin L, et al.: Preserving renal function in adults with hypertension and diabetes: a consensus approach. National Kidney Foundation Hypertension and Diabetes Executive Committees Working Group. Am J Kidney Dis 2000, 36:646–661.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    American Diabetes Association: clinical practice recommendations 2002 [no authors listed]. Diabetes Care 2004, 27(suppl 1):S1–S126. Latest recommendations for the treatment of people with diabetes, with an emphasis on lifestyle and early intervention.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bruno G, Merletti F, Biggeri A, et al.: Progression to overt nephropathy in type 2 diabetes: the Casale Monferrato Study. Diabetes.Care 2003, 26:2150–2155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eknoyan G, Hostetter T, Bakris GL, et al.: Proteinuria and other markers of chronic kidney disease: a position statement of the national kidney foundation (NKF) and the national institute of diabetes and digestive and kidney diseases (NIDDK). Am J Kidney Dis 2003, 42:617–622. Provides the latest recommendations on how to use albuminuria as a marker of CV and renal risk.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garg JP, Bakris GL: Microalbuminuria: marker of vascular dysfunction, risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Vasc Med 2002, 7:35–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keane WF, Eknoyan G: Proteinuria, albuminuria, risk, assessment, detection, elimination (PARADE): a position paper of the National Kidney Foundation. Am J Kidney Dis 1999, 33:1004–1010.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ljungman S, Wikstrand J, Hartford M, Berglund G: Urinary albumin excretion—a predictor of risk of cardiovascular disease. A prospective 10-year follow-up of middle-aged nondiabetic normal and hypertensive men. Am J Hypertens 1996, 9:770–778.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dahl-Jorgensen K, Bjoro T, Kierulf P, et al.: Long-term glycemic control and kidney function in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Kidney Int 1992, 41:920–923.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Effect of intensive therapy on the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. The Diabetes Control and Complications (DCCT) Research Group [no authors listed]. Kidney Int 1995, 47:1703–1720.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sustained effect of intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus on development and progression of diabetic nephropathy: the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study [no authors listed]. JAMA 2003, 290:2159–2167.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults—The Evidence Report. National Institutes of Health [no authors listed]. Obes Res 1998, 6(suppl 2):51S–209S.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sacks FM, Svetkey LP, Vollmer WM, et al.: Effects on blood pressure of reduced dietary sodium and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet. DASHSodium Collaborative Research Group. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:3–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Whelton SP, Chin A, Xin X, He J: Effect of aerobic exercise on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med 2002, 136:493–503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Halbert JA, Silagy CA, Finucane P, et al.: Exercise training and blood lipids in hyperlipidemic and normolipidemic adults: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr 1999, 53:514–522.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG, et al.: Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:1343–1350.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) Research Group: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP): description of lifestyle intervention. Diabetes Care 2002, 25:2165–2171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mazouz H, Kacso I, Ghazali A, et al.: Risk factors of renal failure progression two years prior to dialysis. Clin Nephrol 1999, 51:355–366.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bakris GL, Weir MR: Salt intake and reductions in arterial pressure and proteinuria. Is there a direct link? Am J Hypertens 1996, 9:200S-206S.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weinberger MH, Miller JZ, Luft FC, et al.: Definitions and characteristics of sodium sensitivity and blood pressure resistance. Hypertension 1986, 8:II127-II134.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Campese VM, Parise M, Karubian F, Bigazzi R: Abnormal renal hemodynamics in black salt-sensitive patients with hypertension. Hypertension 1991, 18:805–812.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Estacio RO, Jeffers BW, Gifford N, Schrier RW: Effect of blood pressure control on diabetic microvascular complications in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2000, 23(suppl 2):B54-B64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bakris GL, Weir MR: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-associated elevations in serum creatinine: is this a cause for concern? Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:685–693.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jafar TH, Stark PC, Schmid CH, 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, 139:244–252.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maschio G, Alberti D, Janin G, et al.: Effect of the angiotensinconverting-enzyme inhibitor benazepril on the progression of chronic renal insufficiency. The Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibition in Progressive Renal Insufficiency Study Group. N Engl J Med 1996, 334:939–945.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weinberg MS, Kaperonis N, Bakris GL: How high should an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker be dosed in patients with diabetic nephropathy? Curr Hypertens Rep 2003, 5:418–425.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Remuzzi G, Ruggenenti P, Benigni A: Understanding the nature of renal disease progression. Kidney Int 1997, 51:2–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators [no authors listed]. Lancet 2000, 355:253–259.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    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) [no authors listed]. JAMA 2002, 288:2981–2997.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bakris GL, Smith AC, Richardson DJ, et al.: Impact of an ACE inhibitor and calcium antagonist on microalbuminuria and lipid subfractions in type 2 diabetes: a randomised, multi-centre pilot study. J Hum Hypertens 2002, 16:185–191.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ravid M, Neumann L, Lishner M: Plasma lipids and the progression of nephropathy in diabetes mellitus type II: effect of ACE inhibitors. Kidney Int 1995, 47:907–910.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al.: Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:861–869.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, et al.: Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:851–860.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pfeffer MA, McMurray JJ, Velazquez EJ, et al.: Valsartan, captopril, or both in myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure, left ventricular dysfunction, or both. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:1893–1906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gayet JL: The OPTIMAAL trial: losartan or captopril after acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 2002, 360:1884–1885.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Parving HH, Lehnert H, Brochner-Mortensen J, et al.: The effect of irbesartan on the development of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:870–878.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nakao N, Yoshimura A, Morita H, et al.: Combination treatment of angiotensin-II receptor blocker and angiotensinconverting-enzyme inhibitor in non-diabetic renal disease (COOPERATE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003, 361:117–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al.: Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002, 359:995–1003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Koyama Y, Kodama K, Suzuki M, Harano Y: Improvement of insulin sensitivity by a long-acting nifedipine preparation (nifedipine-CR) in patients with essential hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2002, 15:927–931.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zanella MT, Kohlmann O Jr, Ribeiro AB: Treatment of obesity hypertension and diabetes syndrome. Hypertension 2001, 38:705–708.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Black HR, Elliott WJ, Grandits G, et al.: Principal results of the Controlled Onset Verapamil Investigation of Cardiovascular End Points (CONVINCE) trial. JAMA 2003, 289:2073–2082.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pepine CJ, Handberg EM, Cooper-DeHoff RM, et al.: A calcium antagonist vs a noncalcium antagonist hypertension treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease. The International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST): a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2003, 290:2805–2816.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Turnbull F: Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectively designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet 2003, 362:1527–1535.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bakris GL, Weir MR, Shanifar S, et al.: Effects of blood pressure level on progression of diabetic nephropathy: results from the RENAAL study. Arch Intern Med 2003, 163:1555–1565.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Higashi Y, Itabe H, Fukase H, et al.: Transmembrane lipid transfer is crucial for providing neutral lipids during very low density lipoprotein assembly in endoplasmic reticulum. J Biol Chem 2003, 278:21450–21458.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mykkanen L, Kuusisto J, Pyorala K, et al.: Increased risk of noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in elderly hypertensive subjects. J Hypertens 1994, 12:1425–1432.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Gress TW, Nieto FJ, Shahar E, et al.: Hypertension and antihypertensive therapy as risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. N Engl J Med 2000, 342:905–912.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group [no authors listed]. BMJ 1998, 317:703–713.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Poole-Wilson PA, Swedberg K, Cleland JG, et al.: Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003, 362:7–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dargie HJ: Effect of carvedilol on outcome after myocardial infarction in patients with left-ventricular dysfunction: the CAPRICORN randomised trial. Lancet 2001, 357:1385–1390.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nitin Khosla
  • Peter Hart
  • George L. Bakris
    • 1
  1. 1.Rush University Hypertension CenterRush University Medical CenterChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations