Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25008301›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2014

Treatment resistant hypertension--investigation and conservative management.

Franz Weber, Manfred Anlauf

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. In reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2015
    Article
  5. Better risk assessment for individual substances.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2015
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Franz WeberSt Walburga Hospital, Meschede, Private Practice at the Medical Care Center, Dialysis Center, Cuxhaven.
Manfred Anlauf

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe introduction of invasive treatments, some of which are irreversible, for the entity called treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) creates the need for a comprehensive discussion of the diagnostic evaluation that TRH requires and the available options for its conservative treatment.

methodThe pertinent literature is selectively reviewed in the light of the authors' longstanding clinical experience.

resultsOur review of the literature suggests that the high prevalence of TRH in Germany (ca. 20%) can be nearly halved with the aid of more thorough diagnostic evaluation. Such an evaluation should include a review of the patient's antihypertensive drugs (adherence, daily dosing, concomitant medication), investigation for other vascular changes that might affect blood pressure measurement, and exclusion of white-coat hypertension, sleep apnea syndrome, and secondary rather than essential hypertension. As there have been no randomized trials of treatment for TRH, the physician confronted with such cases must devise treatments on the basis of observational data and pathophysiological reasoning (volume status considering renin levels, sympathetic blockade, vasodilatation). Such measures can presumably lower the number of truly treatment-resistant cases still further.

conclusionTo save patients from preventable harm, patients should undergo a thorough diagnostic evaluation and-under close monitoring for side effects-conservative pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments should be deployed before any invasive treatment is performed.

Indexed as

Adrenergic beta-AntagonistsAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAntihypertensive AgentsCalcium Channel BlockersChronic DiseaseDiureticsDrug ResistanceHumansHypertensionPrevalenceAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAntihypertensive AgentsCalcium Channel BlockersDiuretics

Identifiers

PMID25008301
PMCPMC4095581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.