Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26582411›Full record

ReviewJournal of human hypertension2016

From malignant hypertension to hypertension-MOD: a modern definition for an old but still dangerous emergency.

A Cremer, F Amraoui, G Y H Lip, E Morales, S Rubin, J Segura, B J Van den Born, P Gosse

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of human hypertension, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ESC Council on hypertension position document on the management of hypertensive emergencies.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2019
    Guideline
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Brazilian Guidelines of Hypertension - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

A CremerDepartment of Cardiology/Hypertension, University hospital of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
F AmraouiDepartment of vascular medicine, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G Y H LipUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
E MoralesDepartment of Nephrology. Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
S RubinDepartment of Cardiology/Hypertension, University hospital of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
J SeguraDepartment of Nephrology. Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4677-9526
B J Van den BornDepartment of vascular medicine, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P GosseDepartment of Cardiology/Hypertension, University hospital of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Université de Bordeaux · FRAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLResearch Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre · ESBirmingham City Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevalence of malignant hypertension has clearly fallen with the advent of anti-hypertensive medication but has remained stable over the past 30-40 years in spite of progress in diagnosis and management of hypertension. A diagnosis of malignant hypertension is usually based on the association of severely elevated blood pressure with a Keith and Wagener stage III or IV retinopathy. We believe that this definition can be reconsidered for several reasons. Although simple and pragmatic, this definition corresponds to a time when there were few techniques for assessment of hypertensive target organ involvement, and does not take into account involvement of kidney, brain and heart; whereas the overall prognosis largely depends on how much they are affected. On the contrary, the acute blood pressure level and especially diastolic should not be a hard diagnostic criterion as it does not itself constitute the prognosis of the condition. We propose to consider that malignant hypertension with retinopathy is only one of a number of possible presentation(s) of acute hypertension with multi organ damage (hypertension multi organ damage (MOD)) and that the recognition of these hypertensive emergencies, when retinopathy is lacking, be based on acute elevation of BP associated with impairment of at least three different target organs. The objective of a new and expanded definition is to facilitate recognition of these true emergencies. The condition is more common than usually perceived and would have a much worse prognosis than the usual forms of hypertension. Early recognition and management of hypertension-MOD are fundamental to any improvement in prognosis.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureEarly DiagnosisHumansHypertension, MalignantMultiple Organ FailurePredictive Value of TestsRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID26582411
OpenAlexW2174783839

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.