Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
The Back Pages

Hypertension guidelines: thresholds, targets, and teratogenicity

Una Martin
British Journal of General Practice 2008; 58 (553): 585. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp08X319800
Una Martin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

The current British Hypertension Society (BHS) Guidelines for the management of Hypertension run to an impressive 46 pages.1 The Quick Reference Guide on management of hypertension in adults in primary care published by the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in June 2006 is shorter at 11 pages.2 Both documents give essentially the same message about thresholds, treatments, and targets for hypertensive patients with the NICE guide providing easy to follow, colourful flow diagrams. By definition clinical guidelines need to be clear and user-friendly but I worry that important and subtle messages may be lost completely in the process. A case in point is the management of hypertension in young women of childbearing age. In the NICE Quick Reference Guide only one line mentions this group saying that beta blockers should be avoided in women of childbearing age. There is no mention of why and no reference to the potential dangers of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) should these women become pregnant.

Research emerging in the early 1990s indicated a causative association between the use of ACE inhibitors during pregnancy and the development of severe fetal abnormalities. A significantly increased incidence of oligohydramnios, neonatal renal failure, pulmonary hypoplasia, calvarial hypoplasia, and fetal death were reported. These effects are thought to be the result of hypoperfusion of the fetal kidneys during development.3 The increased risk of fetal abnormalities was initially thought to be limited to women receiving ACE inhibitor therapy in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. However, a more recent study has suggested a significantly increased risk (>2.7) of major congenital malformations in women receiving ACE inhibitor therapy in the first trimester of pregnancy.4 A higher incidence of fetal abnormalities in the offspring of women taking ARBs during pregnancy has also been noted.5

Current BHS guidelines recommend ACE inhibitors as first-line agents for younger, non-black patients but advise that these agents should be avoided in women who wish to become pregnant. The recommendations also state that ACE inhibitors and ARBs should be discontinued immediately if a woman were to become pregnant while receiving treatment with either agent. The Quick Reference NICE guidelines suggest beta blockers may have a role in younger women but do not specify why.2 Despite their known adverse effects, recent US data shows that 4.4% of women of childbearing age (15–44 years) take ACE inhibitors, reflecting an 83% increase in use from 1995–2002.6 In addition, a UK poll suggests that 40% of pregnancies are unplanned, with over half of these due to lack of contraception.7

At the Hypertension Clinic, University Hospital Birmingham we recently investigated the number of women of childbearing age (16–45 years), who had been prescribed ACE inhibitors or ARBs in primary care before referral.8

In addition, contraceptive use by these women was evaluated to assess whether adequate precautions were being taken to prevent pregnancy in these at-risk patients. A cohort of female patients aged 16–45 years was identified from approximately 1500 new referrals from January 2004 to October 2006, excluding those not taking antihypertensive medication. Contraceptive status was established where possible. Forty-seven of 101 (47%) women aged 16–45 years were taking an ACE inhibitor (n = 35) an ARB (n = 11) or both (n = 1) of whom 26 (55%) were aged 16–40 years. In this younger group, eight were using no contraception and three were using barrier methods only. In other words, one-quarter of women in the study were taking these agents and were aged 40 years or less; of these, many were not using reliable contraception. The study identifies a worrying trend to use ACE inhibitors or ARBs in younger women who are at risk of poor perinatal outcomes if they become pregnant.

On the basis of this small study and my own clinical experience I feel that the BHS and NICE guidelines may put younger women at risk if doctors are unaware of potential fetotoxic and teratogenic consequences of prescribing ACE inhibitors and ARBs. When I give talks to GPs and hospital doctors, several colleagues confirm that they were previously unaware of such an association. A final point that the study highlighted was the surprising number of young women who were taking antihypertensives in the first place. This brings me on to thresholds for intervention, white coat hypertension, and appropriateness of treatment in this very low-risk group: important subjects for another Viewpoint, perhaps.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, 2008.

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Williams B,
    2. Poulter NR,
    3. Brown M J,
    4. et al.
    (2004) Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the fourth working party of the British Hypertension Society, 2004-BHS IV. J Hum Hypertens 18:139–185.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
    (2006) Hypertension: management of hypertension in adults, inprimary care (NICE, London) Ref CG034. http://www.nice.org.uk:80/nicemedia/pdf/cg034quickrefguide.pdf (accessed 4 Jul 2008).
  3. ↵
    1. Shotan A,
    2. Widerhorn J,
    3. Hurst A,
    4. Elkayam U
    (1994) Risks of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition during pregnancy: experimental and clinical evidence, potential mechanisms, and recommendations for use. Am J Med 96:451–456.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Cooper WO,
    2. Hernandez-Diaz S,
    3. Arbogast PG,
    4. et al.
    (2006) Major congenital malformations after first-trimester exposure to ACE inhibitors. N Engl J Med 354:2443–2451.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Quan A
    (2006) Fetopathy associated with exposure to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor antagonists. Early Hum Dev 82:23–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Murphy HR,
    2. Temple RC,
    3. Roland JM,
    4. et al.
    (2007) Improving outcomes of pregnancy for women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Br J Diabetes Vasc Dis 7:38–2.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. BBC
    (2006) 40% of pregnancies ‘unplanned’ (BBC, London) http://news.bbc.co.Uk/l/hi/health/3515400.stm (accessed 4 Jul 2008).
  8. ↵
    1. Martin U,
    2. Foreman MA,
    3. Travis JC,
    4. et al.
    (2008) Use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs in hypertensive women of childbearing age. J Clin Pharm Ther 33:1–5, In press.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 58 (553)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 58, Issue 553
August 2008
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Hypertension guidelines: thresholds, targets, and teratogenicity
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Hypertension guidelines: thresholds, targets, and teratogenicity
Una Martin
British Journal of General Practice 2008; 58 (553): 585. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp08X319800

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Hypertension guidelines: thresholds, targets, and teratogenicity
Una Martin
British Journal of General Practice 2008; 58 (553): 585. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp08X319800
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

The Back Pages

  • What is the collective noun for a group of patients?
  • Development of undergraduate family medicine teaching in China
  • The ethics of listening and responding to patients' narratives: implications for practice
Show more The Back Pages

Essay

  • Second thoughts about the NHS reforms
  • Good enough care?
  • Social prescribing in very deprived areas
Show more Essay

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242