Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Hypertension
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Hypertension. 1983;5:147-154

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Alicandri, C.
Right arrow Articles by Greenstreet, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Alicandri, C.
Right arrow Articles by Greenstreet, R. L.

Hypertension, Vol 5, 147-154, Copyright © 1983 by American Heart Association


ARTICLES

Sympathetic contribution to the cardiac response to stress in hypertension

C Alicandri, FM Fouad, RC Tarazi, EL Bravo and RL Greenstreet

Studies of cardiac performance in hypertension have often been restricted to cardiac output determinations, although the latter alone are inadequate for that purpose. To define the range of cardiac performance in hypertension, the response of left ventricular filling pressure to increased workload (static exercise) was determined in 39 subjects--eight normotensive (NT) volunteers, seven patients with borderline hypertension (BLH), and 24 essential hypertensives (EH), of age-matched groups. A rise of mean pulmonary wedge pressure (PWP) by 5 mm Hg or more during maximum handgrip (HG) was considered "abnormal" for a workload (SBP x HR x 10(-3)) increase of greater than or equal to 25%. All NT subjects and all patients with BLH as well as 16 of the 24 EH (EH-I) showed normal cardiac performance by this definition. In contrast, PWP increased greater than or equal to 5 mm Hg during HG in eight patients with EH (EH-II). The calculated increase in cardiac workload was not significantly different among the four groups (+5, 5.8, 5.4 and 5.5 respectively). Beta blockade (propranolol, 10 mg i.v.) slowed heart rate in all subjects and reduced SBP x HR product in all groups both at rest and during HG. Responses of PWP to HG were widely divergent in the different patients. However, as a group those patients with "impaired cardiac performance" before propranolol (EH-II) had a greater reduction in performance following propranolol than EH-I or NT. This study suggests that adrenergic support of cardiac performance might be important in some hypertensive patients with no evidence of heart failure.