This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 44/3/e5    most recent 01.HYP.0000136565.49396.c7v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Materson, B. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Materson, B. J. Related Collections Other hypertension Clinical Studies Other etiology

(Hypertension. 2004;44:e5.)
© 2004 American Heart Association, Inc.

Hypertension Electronic Pages

Letter to the Editor

Is "Essential" Hypertension Essential?

University of Miami, Miami, Florida

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

To the Editor:

The term "essential" hypertension, although deeply embedded in the literature and common use, has long been obsolete. Norman Kaplan has included the following paragraph in at least the past 3 editions of Clinical Hypertension.¹

"... As much as 95% of all hypertension is of unknown cause. In the absence of a known cause, there is no obvious name for the disease. Essential may be mistakenly interpreted to infer an essential need for higher pressure to push blood through vessels narrowed by age. The term benign has been buried along with the millions of unfortunate victims of uncontrolled hypertension. Idiopathic seems a bit unwieldy; so I have chosen primary simply to distinguish it from all the remaining hypertensive diseases, which are ‘secondary’ to known causes."

I also prefer the term "primary" to distinguish hypertension of unknown etiology from hypertension secondary to a defined cause. If someone of the stature of Dr Kaplan could not effect change in this terminology, I have little hope for doing so merely by writing about it. I, therefore, offer the following suggestion:

If the editors of Hypertension were to request that all authors use the term "primary" rather than "essential" hypertension, change could be effected rapidly. The conversion could be made in final drafts or even galley proofs of accepted manuscripts. There would be little cost or effort and no one would be penalized for using the term "essential" in the original submission. If this became the policy for Hypertension, perhaps . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. D. Moulopoulos and N. Zakopoulos Letter to the Editor: "Idiopathic" Instead of "Essential" or "Primary" Hypertension? Hypertension, August 1, 2005; 46(2): e3 - e3. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Yagil, C. Yagil, and B. J. Materson Is It Essential to Change the Term "Essential Hypertension"? * Response: Is It Essential to Change the Term "Essential Hypertension" Hypertension, November 1, 2004; 44(5): e7 - e7. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. E. Hall Hypertension Online Only: September 2004 Hypertension, September 1, 2004; 44(3): 372 - 372. [Full Text] [PDF]