Evidence Hub

Testing for Primary Aldosteronism and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist Use Among U.S. Veterans: A Retrospective Cohort Study

J. Cohen, D. Cohen, D. Herman, J. Leppert, J. B. Byrd, Vivek Bhalla

Annals of Internal Medicine, 2020

269 participants · 119 citations

Abstract

Background: Primary aldosteronism is a common cause of treatment-resistant hypertension. However, evidence from local health systems suggests low rates of testing for primary aldosteronism. Objective: To evaluate testing rates for primary aldosteronism and evidence-based hypertension management in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: U.S. Veterans Health Administration. Participants: Veterans with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (n = 269 010) from 2000 to 2017, defined as either 2 blood pressures (BPs) of at least 140 mm Hg (systolic) or 90 mm Hg (diastolic) at least 1 month apart during use of 3 antihypertensive agents (including a diuretic), or hypertension requiring at least 4 antihypertensive classes. Measurements: Rates of primary aldosteronism testing (plasma aldosterone–renin) and the association of testing with evidence-based treatment using a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) and with longitudinal systolic BP. Results: 4277 (1.6%) patients who were tested for primary aldosteronism were identified. An index visit with a nephrologist (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05 [95% CI, 1.66 to 2.52]) or an endocrinologist (HR, 2.48 [CI, 1.69 to 3.63]) was associated with a higher likelihood of testing compared with primary care. Testing was associated with a 4-fold higher likelihood of initiating MRA therapy (HR, 4.10 [CI, 3.68 to 4.55]) and with better BP control over time. Limitations: Predominantly male…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 269 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free