Jorge Polónia

Bio: Jorge Polónia is an academic researcher from University of Porto. The author has contributed to research in topics: Blood pressure & Ambulatory blood pressure. The author has an hindex of 31, co-authored 174 publications receiving 17441 citations. Previous affiliations of Jorge Polónia include Western Infirmary & University of Aveiro.

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).

Abstract: ABCD : Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes ABI : ankle–brachial index ABPM : ambulatory blood pressure monitoring ACCESS : Acute Candesartan Cilexetil Therapy in Stroke Survival ACCOMPLISH : Avoiding Cardiovascular Events in Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension ACCORD : Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ACE : angiotensin-converting enzyme ACTIVE I : Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events ADVANCE : Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation AHEAD : Action for HEAlth in Diabetes ALLHAT : Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart ATtack ALTITUDE : ALiskiren Trial In Type 2 Diabetes Using Cardio-renal Endpoints ANTIPAF : ANgioTensin II Antagonist In Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation APOLLO : A Randomized Controlled Trial of Aliskiren in the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Elderly People ARB : angiotensin receptor blocker ARIC : Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities ARR : aldosterone renin ratio ASCOT : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial ASCOT-LLA : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm ASTRAL : Angioplasty and STenting for Renal Artery Lesions A-V : atrioventricular BB : beta-blocker BMI : body mass index BP : blood pressure BSA : body surface area CA : calcium antagonist CABG : coronary artery bypass graft CAPPP : CAPtopril Prevention Project CAPRAF : CAndesartan in the Prevention of Relapsing Atrial Fibrillation CHD : coronary heart disease CHHIPS : Controlling Hypertension and Hypertension Immediately Post-Stroke CKD : chronic kidney disease CKD-EPI : Chronic Kidney Disease—EPIdemiology collaboration CONVINCE : Controlled ONset Verapamil INvestigation of CV Endpoints CT : computed tomography CV : cardiovascular CVD : cardiovascular disease D : diuretic DASH : Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension DBP : diastolic blood pressure DCCT : Diabetes Control and Complications Study DIRECT : DIabetic REtinopathy Candesartan Trials DM : diabetes mellitus DPP-4 : dipeptidyl peptidase 4 EAS : European Atherosclerosis Society EASD : European Association for the Study of Diabetes ECG : electrocardiogram EF : ejection fraction eGFR : estimated glomerular filtration rate ELSA : European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis ESC : European Society of Cardiology ESH : European Society of Hypertension ESRD : end-stage renal disease EXPLOR : Amlodipine–Valsartan Combination Decreases Central Systolic Blood Pressure more Effectively than the Amlodipine–Atenolol Combination FDA : U.S. Food and Drug Administration FEVER : Felodipine EVent Reduction study GISSI-AF : Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico-Atrial Fibrillation HbA1c : glycated haemoglobin HBPM : home blood pressure monitoring HOPE : Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation HOT : Hypertension Optimal Treatment HRT : hormone replacement therapy HT : hypertension HYVET : HYpertension in the Very Elderly Trial IMT : intima-media thickness I-PRESERVE : Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Systolic Function INTERHEART : Effect of Potentially Modifiable Risk Factors associated with Myocardial Infarction in 52 Countries INVEST : INternational VErapamil SR/T Trandolapril ISH : Isolated systolic hypertension JNC : Joint National Committee JUPITER : Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin LAVi : left atrial volume index LIFE : Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertensives LV : left ventricle/left ventricular LVH : left ventricular hypertrophy LVM : left ventricular mass MDRD : Modification of Diet in Renal Disease MRFIT : Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial MRI : magnetic resonance imaging NORDIL : The Nordic Diltiazem Intervention study OC : oral contraceptive OD : organ damage ONTARGET : ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial PAD : peripheral artery disease PATHS : Prevention And Treatment of Hypertension Study PCI : percutaneous coronary intervention PPAR : peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor PREVEND : Prevention of REnal and Vascular ENdstage Disease PROFESS : Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Secondary Strokes PROGRESS : Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study PWV : pulse wave velocity QALY : Quality adjusted life years RAA : renin-angiotensin-aldosterone RAS : renin-angiotensin system RCT : randomized controlled trials RF : risk factor ROADMAP : Randomized Olmesartan And Diabetes MicroAlbuminuria Prevention SBP : systolic blood pressure SCAST : Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker Candesartan for Treatment of Acute STroke SCOPE : Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly SCORE : Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation SHEP : Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program STOP : Swedish Trials in Old Patients with Hypertension STOP-2 : The second Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension SYSTCHINA : SYSTolic Hypertension in the Elderly: Chinese trial SYSTEUR : SYSTolic Hypertension in Europe TIA : transient ischaemic attack TOHP : Trials Of Hypertension Prevention TRANSCEND : Telmisartan Randomised AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease UKPDS : United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study VADT : Veterans' Affairs Diabetes Trial VALUE : Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation WHO : World Health Organization ### 1.1 Principles The 2013 guidelines on hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and the European Society of Cardiology …

Prognostic Effect of the Nocturnal Blood Pressure Fall in Hypertensive Patients The Ambulatory Blood Pressure Collaboration in Patients With Hypertension (ABC-H) Meta-Analysis

Abstract: The prognostic importance of the nocturnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) fall, adjusted for average 24-hour SBP levels, is unclear. The Ambulatory Blood Pressure Collaboration in Patients With Hypertension (ABC-H) examined this issue in a meta-analysis of 17 312 hypertensives from 3 continents. Risks were computed for the systolic night-to-day ratio and for different dipping patterns (extreme, reduced, and reverse dippers) relative to normal dippers. ABC-H investigators provided multivariate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), with and without adjustment for 24-hour SBP, for total cardiovascular events (CVEs), coronary events, strokes, cardiovascular mortality, and total mortality. Average 24-hour SBP varied from 131 to 140 mm Hg and systolic night-to-day ratio from 0.88 to 0.93. There were 1769 total CVEs, 916 coronary events, 698 strokes, 450 cardiovascular deaths, and 903 total deaths. After adjustment for 24-hour SBP, the systolic night-to-day ratio predicted all outcomes: from a 1-SD increase, summary HRs were 1.12 to 1.23. Reverse dipping also predicted all end points: HRs were 1.57 to 1.89. Reduced dippers, relative to normal dippers, had a significant 27% higher risk for total CVEs. Risks for extreme dippers were significantly influenced by antihypertensive treatment (P<0.001): untreated patients had increased risk of total CVEs (HR, 1.92), whereas treated patients had borderline lower risk (HR, 0.72) than normal dippers. For CVEs, heterogeneity was low for systolic night-to-day ratio and reverse/reduced dipping and moderate for extreme dippers. Quality of included studies was moderate to high, and publication bias was undetectable. In conclusion, in this largest meta-analysis of hypertensive patients, the nocturnal BP fall provided substantial prognostic information, independent of 24-hour SBP levels.

Prognostic impact from clinic, daytime, and night-time systolic blood pressure in nine cohorts of 13,844 patients with hypertension.

Abstract: Background and method To determine which SBP measure best predicts cardiovascular events (CVEs) independently, a systematic review was conducted for cohorts with all patients diagnosed with hypertension, 1+ years follow-up, and coronary artery disease and stroke outcomes. Lead investigators provided ad hoc analyses for each cohort. Meta-analyses gave hazard ratios from clinic SBP (CSBP), daytime SBP (DSBP), and night-time SBP (NSBP). Coefficients of variation of SBP measured dispersion. Nine cohorts (n = 13,844) were from Europe, Brazil, and Japan. For sleep-wake SBP classification, seven cohorts used patient-specific information. Results Overall, NSBP's dispersion exceeded DSBP's dispersion by 22.6% with nonoverlapping confidence limits. Within all nine cohorts, dispersion for NSBP exceeded that for CSBP and DSBP. For each comparison, P = 0.004 that this occurred by chance. Considered individually, increases in NSBP, DSBP, and CSBP each predicted CVEs: hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) = 1.25 (1.22-1.29), 1.20 (1.15-1.26), and 1.11 (1.06-1.16), respectively. However, after simultaneous adjustment for all three SBPs, hazard ratios were 1.26 (1.20-1.31), 1.01 (0.94-1.08), and 1.00 (0.95-1.05), respectively. Cohorts with baseline antihypertensive treatment and cohorts with patient-specific information for night-day BP classification gave similar results. Within most cohorts, simultaneously adjusted hazard ratios were greater for NSBP than for DSBP and CSBP: P = 0.023 and 0.012, respectively, that this occurred by chance. Conclusion In hypertensive patients, NSBP had greater dispersion than DSBP and CSBP in all cohorts. On simultaneous adjustment, compared with DSBP and CSBP, increased NSBP independently predicted higher CVEs in most cohorts, and, overall, NSBP independently predicted CVEs, whereas CSBP and DSBP lost their predictive ability entirely.

An educational intervention to improve physician reporting of adverse drug reactions: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Abstract: ContextData on the adverse effects of newly marketed drugs are limited. Voluntary reporting is an important part of postmarketing surveillance but is underused by physicians.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of educational outreach visits for improving adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting by physicians.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA cluster-randomized controlled trial covering all National Health System physicians in the north of Portugal, with intervention in March 2004 through July 2004, and 13 to 16 months of follow-up. A total of 1388 physicians were assigned in 4 spatial clusters to the intervention group, and 5063 were assigned in 11 clusters to the control group.InterventionOne-hour educational outreach visits tailored to training needs identified in a previous study.Main Outcome MeasuresChange in total number of reported ADRs and number of serious, high-causality, unexpected, and new-drug-related ADRs, using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for baseline ADR reporting, age, specialty, and work setting.ResultsAt baseline, ADR reporting rates (per 1000 physician-years) did not differ significantly between the intervention groups and the control groups in reporting ADRs overall (7.6 vs 11.3), nor did they differ significantly by category: serious, 4.3 vs 6.0; high-causality, 5.4 vs 7.6; unexpected, 1.6 vs 3.5; and new-drug-related ADRs, 3.7 vs 3.8. (P>.05 for all comparisons). The control group had no significant increase in ADR reports during follow-up. The adjusted increase in ADR reporting rates attributable to intervention was 90.19 for total ADRs (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.51-125.87; relative risk [RR], 10.23; 95% CI, 3.81-27.51), 30.16 for serious ADRs (95% CI, 18.84-41.47; RR, 6.32; 95% CI, 2.09-19.16), 64.90 for high-causality ADRs (95% CI, 38.38-91.42; RR, 8.75; 95% CI, 3.05-25.07), 28.04 for unexpected ADRs (95% CI, 16.25-39.83; RR, 30.21; 95% CI, 4.54-200.84), and 42.17 for new-drug-related ADRs (95% CI, 21.58-62.76; RR, 8.05; 95% CI, 2.10 -30.83). The greatest difference occurred during the first 4 months after intervention, but differences remained statistically significant for 12 months.ConclusionA targeted outreach program may improve high-quality reporting of ADRs among physicians.

Physicians' attitudes and adverse drug reaction reporting : a case-control study in Portugal.

Abstract: Objectives: Voluntary adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting is fundamental to medical drug safety surveillance; however, substantial under-reporting exists and is the main limitation of the system. This study sought to identify the knowledge-and attitude-related factors associated with ADR reporting by physicians in Northern Portugal. Methods: Case-control study covering a population of National Health Service medical practitioners. The 88 cases comprised physicians who had reported at least one ADR to the drug surveillance unit from the year 2000 to the date of enrolment in the study. The 771 controls were randomly selected from among the remaining physicians. All interviews were conducted using a self-administered questionnaire. Knowledge and attitudes regarding spontaneous ADR reporting were based on Inman’s ‘seven deadly sins’. Agreement with the questions included in the questionnaire was measured using a horizontal, continuous visual analogue scale, which was unnumbered. Recorded answers were read in a range from zero (total disagreement) to ten (total agreement). We used logistic regression to determine the ADR reporting adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) for a change in exposure corresponding to the interquartile range for each attitude. Results: A total of 397 questionnaires were received from 731 eligible practitioners (54.3%). Physicians who worked in primary versus hospital care (ORadj 7.74 [95% CI 1.85, 32.30]) and in general medicine (ORadj 1.05 [95% CI 0.30, 3.69]) versus medical specialities were more likely to report ADRs. In contrast, physicians working in the medical-surgical/surgical fields were significantly less likely to report ADRs compared with medical specialists (ORadj 0.10 [95% CI 0.02, 0.46]). Attitudes to ADRs were strongly associated with reporting probability. Hence, an interquartile decrease in any of the following attitudes increased the probability of reporting by: (i) 87% (p < 0.05) for complacency (the belief that really serious ADRs are well documented by the time a drug is marketed); (ii) 109% (p < 0.01) for insecurity (the belief that it is nearly impossible to determine whether a drug is responsible for a particular adverse reaction); (iii) 143% (p < 0.001) for diffidence (the belief that one would only report an ADR if one were sure that it was related to the use of a particular drug); (iv) 220% (p < 0.001) for indifference (the belief that the one case an individual doctor might see could not contribute to medical knowledge); and (v) 71% (p < 0.05) for ignorance (the belief that it is only necessary to report serious or unexpected ADRs). Conclusion: This study shows that there are attitudes strongly associated with under-reporting. The implementation of purpose-designed educational interventions based on the attitudes identified in this study may serve to improve reporting substantially.

2007 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).

Abstract: 2007 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).

2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure

Abstract: ACC/AHA : American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association ACCF/AHA : American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association ACE : angiotensin-converting enzyme ACEI : angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ACS : acute coronary syndrome AF : atrial fibrillation

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Stephanie E. Chiuve, ScD Mary Cushman, MD, MSc, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, FAHA Rajat Deo, MD, MTR Sarah D. de Ferranti, MD, MPH James Floyd, MD, MS Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Cathleen Gillespie, MS Carmen R. Isasi, MD, PhD, FAHA Monik C. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD Daniel Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, MPH, FAHA Simin Liu, MD, ScD, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Rachel H. Mackey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Khurram Nasir, MD, MPH, FAHA Robert W. Neumar, MD, PhD, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA Dilip K. Pandey, MBBS, MS, PhD, FAHA Ravi R. Thiagarajan, MD, MPH Mathew J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, FAHA Comilla Sasson, MD, PhD, FAHA Amytis Towfighi, MD Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH Melanie B. Turner, MPH Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA Jenifer H. Voeks, PhD Joshua Z. Willey, MD, MS John T. Wilkins, MD Jason HY. Wu, MSc, PhD, FAHA Heather M. Alger, PhD Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Paul Muntner, PhD, MHSc On behalf of the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update

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)

Abstract: Hypertension is the most common condition seen in primary care and leads to myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure, and death if not detected early and treated appropriately. Patients want to be assured that blood pressure (BP) treatment will reduce their disease burden, while clinicians want guidance on hypertension management using the best scientific evidence. This report takes a rigorous, evidence-based approach to recommend treatment thresholds, goals, and medications in the management of hypertension in adults. Evidence was drawn from randomized controlled trials, which represent the gold standard for determining efficacy and effectiveness. Evidence quality and recommendations were graded based on their effect on important outcomes. There is strong evidence to support treating hypertensive persons aged 60 years or older to a BP goal of less than 150/90 mm Hg and hypertensive persons 30 through 59 years of age to a diastolic goal of less than 90 mm Hg; however, there is insufficient evidence in hypertensive persons younger than 60 years for a systolic goal, or in those younger than 30 years for a diastolic goal, so the panel recommends a BP of less than 140/90 mm Hg for those groups based on expert opinion. The same thresholds and goals are recommended for hypertensive adults with diabetes or nondiabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD) as for the general hypertensive population younger than 60 years. There is moderate evidence to support initiating drug treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide-type diuretic in the nonblack hypertensive population, including those with diabetes. In the black hypertensive population, including those with diabetes, a calcium channel blocker or thiazide-type diuretic is recommended as initial therapy. There is moderate evidence to support initial or add-on antihypertensive therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in persons with CKD to improve kidney outcomes. Although this guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the management of high BP and should meet the clinical needs of most patients, these recommendations are not a substitute for clinical judgment, and decisions about care must carefully consider and incorporate the clinical characteristics and circumstances of each individual patient.