Особенности антигипертензивной терапии и практика назначения селективных агонистов имидазолиновых рецепторов в России по сравнению с другими странами: анализ данных исследования STRAIGHT

Analysis of routine clinical practice of hypertensive patient management represents one of the important tools in the search for further ways to minimize hypertension-associated cardiovascular and renal adverse outcomes. Aim. To compare the strategies for hypertension management and features of clinical use of I₁-imidazoline receptor (I₁-IR) agonists in the Russian Federation and other countries where the STRAIGHT (Selective imidazoline receptor agonists Treatment Recommendation and Action In Global management of HyperTension) study was conducted. Materials and methods. It was a cross-sectional online study involving physicians of various specializations. The study was conducted from January 18 to July 1, 2019, in seven countries with a high rate of I₁-IR agonist prescription, including Russia. Results. A total of 125 (4.5%) responders filled out the survey in the Russian Federation, which was somewhat lower than in other countries (6.8%). The participants were mostly general practitioners (54.0%) and cardiologists (42.0%), while in other countries greater diversity was seen. Most Russian physicians (83.0%) seemed to rely on national clinical guidelines in their routine practice, while in other countries the US guidelines were more popular (66.0%). The majority of responders stated that they took into account the traditional risk factors of hypertension when initiating the therapy; every second responder noted if sleep apnea was present. Awareness of I₁-IR agonists, their prescription rate and their preference were higher in Russia. The main reported benefits of I₁-IR agonists were their efficacy, including in resistant hypertension, and their metabolic effects (in Russia). Most participants preferred I₁-IR agonists as third-line therapy (65.0% in Russia vs 60.0% in other countries) and in combination with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) (55.0% in Russia vs 54.0% in other countries). Compared to responders from other countries, Russian physicians prescribe I₁-IR agonists as first-line (15.0% vs 5.0%) and second-line (48.0% vs 21.0%) therapy more often. Conclusion. Russian physicians were the most aware of I₁-IR agonists and tended to prescribe drugs of this class for hypertension management more often, and I₁-IR agonist combination with ACEi was preferable compared to physician responders from other countries. Antihypertensive efficacy and metabolic effects were reported as the major benefits of I₁-IR agonist therapy.