Abstract-Regular physical exercise is broadly recommended by current European and American hypertension guidelines.It remains elusive, however, whether exercise leads to a reduction of blood pressure in resistant hypertension as well. The present randomized controlled trial examines the cardiovascular effects of aerobic exercise on resistant hypertension. Resistant hypertension was defined as a blood pressure Ն140/90 mm Hg in spite of 3 antihypertensive agents or a blood pressure controlled by Ն4 antihypertensive agents. Fifty subjects with resistant hypertension were randomly assigned to participate or not to participate in an 8-to 12-week treadmill exercise program (target lactate, 2.0Ϯ0.5 mmol/L). Blood pressure was assessed by 24-hour monitoring. Arterial compliance and cardiac index were measured by pulse wave analysis. The training program was well tolerated by all of the patients. Exercise significantly decreased systolic and diastolic daytime ambulatory blood pressure by 6Ϯ12 and 3Ϯ7 mm Hg, respectively (Pϭ0.03 each). Regular exercise reduced blood pressure on exertion and increased physical performance as assessed by maximal oxygen uptake and lactate curves. Arterial compliance and cardiac index remained unchanged. Physical exercise is able to decrease blood pressure even in subjects with low responsiveness to medical treatment. It should be included in the therapeutic approach to resistant hypertension. (Hypertension. 2012;60:653-658.)

This study shows that both calprotectin and NGAL are able to differentiate between pre-renal and intrinsic AKI after exclusion of pyuria. In the present population, calprotectin presents a higher sensitivity and specificity than NGAL.

Isometric handgrip training, performed according to a typical protocol, did not reduce BP in hypertensive patients. Aerobic exercise, even as an uncontrolled and unsupervised exercise regimen, led to a significant reduction of ambulatory and office BP.

Abstract-The introduction of automated oscillometric blood pressure monitors was the basis for today's widespread use of blood pressure self-measurement. However, in atrial fibrillation, there is a controversial debate on the use of oscillometry because there is a high variability of heart rate and stroke volume. To date, the accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure monitoring in atrial fibrillation has only been investigated using auscultatory sphygmomanometry as reference method, which may be biased by arrhythmia as well. We performed a cross-sectional study in 102 patients (52 sinus rhythm, 50 atrial fibrillation) assessing the accuracy of an automated and validated oscillometric upper arm (M5 Professional, Omron) and wrist device (R5 Professional, Omron) to invasively assessed arterial pressure. Blood pressure values were calculated as the mean of 3 consecutive measurements. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure did not significantly differ in patients with sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation, independent of the method of measurement (P>0.05 each). The within-subject variability of the oscillometric measurements was higher in patients with atrial fibrillation compared with sinus rhythm (P<0.01 each). The biases of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, however, did not significantly differ in presence or absence of atrial fibrillation in Bland-Altmann analysis (P>0.05 each). In conclusion, atrial fibrillation did not significantly affect the accuracy of oscillometric measurements, if 3 repeated measurements were performed. (Hypertension. 2013;62:579-584.)