Background. The diagnostics of primary aldosteronism (PA) are usually carried out in patients taking antihypertensive medications. We compared haemodynamics between medicated PA, medicated essential hypertension (EH), never-medicated EH and normotensive controls (n = 130 in all groups). Methods. The hypertensive groups were matched for age (53 years), sex (84 male/46 female) and body mass index (BMI) (30 kg m À2); normotensive controls had similar sex distribution (age 48 years, BMI 27 kg m À2). Haemodynamics were recorded using whole-body impedance cardiography and radial pulse wave analysis, and the results were adjusted as appropriate. Radial blood pressure recordings were calibrated by brachial blood pressure measurements from the contralateral arm. Results. Radial and aortic systolic and diastolic blood pressure was similar in PA and never-medicated EH, and higher than in medicated EH and normotensive controls (P ≤ 0.001 for all comparisons). Extracellular water balance was~4% higher in PA than in all other groups (P < 0.05 for all), whilst cardiac output was~8% higher in PA than in medicated EH (P = 0.012). Systemic vascular resistance and augmentation index were similarly increased in PA and both EH groups when compared with controls. Pulse wave velocity was higher in PA and never-medicated EH than in medicated EH and normotensive controls (P ≤ 0.033 for all comparisons). Conclusions. Medicated PA patients presented with corresponding systemic vascular resistance and wave reflection, but higher extracellular water volume, cardiac output and arterial stiffness than medicated EH patients. Whether the systematic evaluation of these features would benefit the clinical diagnostics of PA remains to be studied in future.

Objective To compare blood pressure (BP) in tonometric radial artery recordings during passive head-up tilt with ambulatory recordings and evaluate possible laboratory cutoff values for hypertension. Methods Laboratory BP and ambulatory BP were recorded in normotensive (n = 69), unmedicated hypertensive (n = 190), and medicated hypertensive (n = 151) subjects. Results Mean age was 50.2 years, BMI 27.7 kg/m2, ambulatory daytime BP 139/87 mmHg, and 276 were male (65%). As supine-to-upright changes in SBP ranged from −52 to +30 mmHg, and in DBP from -21 to +32 mmHg, the mean values of BP supine and upright measurements were compared with ambulatory BP. The mean(supine+upright) systolic laboratory BP was corresponding to ambulatory level (difference +1 mmHg), while mean(supine+upright) DBP was 4 mmHg lower (P < 0.05) than ambulatory value. Correlograms indicated that laboratory 136/82 mmHg corresponded to ambulatory 135/85 mmHg. When compared with ambulatory 135/85 mmHg, the sensitivity and specificity of laboratory 136/82 mmHg to define hypertension were 71.5% and 77.3% for SBP, and 71.7% and 72.8%, for DBP, respectively. The laboratory cutoff 136/82 mmHg classified 311/410 subjects similarly to ambulatory BP as normotensive or hypertensive, 68 were hypertensive only in ambulatory, while 31 were hypertensive only in laboratory measurements. Conclusion BP responses to upright posture were variable. When compared with ambulatory BP, mean(supine+upright) laboratory cutoff 136/82 mmHg classified 76% of subjects similarly as normotensive or hypertensive. In the remaining 24% the discordant results may be attributed to white-coat or masked hypertension, or higher physical activity during out-of-office recordings.