The goal of treating systolic hypertension is to delay and reduce the extent of damage to the heart, the cerebrovascular system, and the kidneys. Lifestyle interventions are a crucial element of successful treatment, including a diet low in sodium (salt) and rich in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables. Clinical trials have also documented the beneficial effects of weight loss, increased physical activity, and limiting alcohol consumption.

In addition to lifestyle changes, medication can also be used to reduce systolic hypertension to safe levels, although medications frequently have side effects, often serious.

Based on these studies, treating to a systolic blood pressure of 140, as long as the diastolic blood pressure is 68 or more, seems safe. Corroborating this, a reanalysis of the SHEP data suggests allowing the diastolic to go below 70 may increase adverse effects.

A meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials found the lowest diastolic blood pressure for which cardiovascular outcomes improve is 85 mm Hg for untreated hypertensives and 80 mm Hg for treated hypertensives. The authors concluded "poor health conditions leading to low blood pressure and an increased risk for death probably explain the J-shaped curve". Interpreting the meta-analysis is difficult, but avoiding a diastolic blood pressure below 68–70 mm Hg seems reasonable because:

- The low value of 85 mm Hg for treated hypertensives in the meta-analysis is higher than the value of 68–70 mm Hg that is suggested by the two major randomized controlled trials of isolated systolic hypertension

- The two largest trials in the meta-analysis, Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program (HDFP) and Medical Research Council trial in mild hypertension (MRC1) were predominantly middle-aged subjects, all of whom had diastolic hypertension before treatment.

- The independent contributions of diseases and factors other than hypertension versus effects of treatment are not clear in the meta-analysis.

A more contemporary meta-analysis by the Cochrane Hypertension group found no benefits in terms of reduced mortality or morbidity from treating patients to lower diastolic targets than 90–100 mmHg.

Regular physical exercise reduces blood pressure. The UK National Health Service advises 150 minutes (2 hours and 30 minutes) of moderate-intensity aerobic activity per week to help prevent hypertension.

It has been suggested that vitamin D deficiency is associated with cardiovascular risk factors. It has been observed that individuals with a vitamin D deficiency have higher systolic and diastolic blood pressures than average. Vitamin D inhibits renin secretion and its activity, it therefore acts as a "negative endocrine regulator of the renin-angiotensin system". Hence, a deficiency in vitamin D leads to an increase in renin secretion. This is one possible mechanism of explaining the observed link between hypertension and vitamin D levels in the blood plasma.

Also, some authorities claim that potassium might both prevent and treat hypertension.

Hypertension results from a complex interaction of genes and environmental factors. Numerous common genetic variants with small effects on blood pressure have been identified as well as some rare genetic variants with large effects on blood pressure. Also, genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 35 genetic loci related to blood pressure; 12 of these genetic loci influencing blood pressure were newly found. Sentinel SNP for each new genetic loci identified has shown an association with DNA methylation at multiple nearby Cpg sites. These sentinel SNP are located within genes related to vascular smooth muscle and renal function. DNA methylation might affect in some way linking common genetic variation to multiple phenotypes even though mechanisms underlying these associations are not understood. Single variant test performed in this study for the 35 sentinel SNP (known and new) showed that genetic variants singly or in aggregate contribute to risk of clinical phenotypes related to high blood pressure.

Blood pressure rises with aging and the risk of becoming hypertensive in later life is considerable. Several environmental factors influence blood pressure. High salt intake raises the blood pressure in salt sensitive individuals; lack of exercise, obesity, and depression can play a role in individual cases. The possible role of other factors such as caffeine consumption, and vitamin D deficiency are less clear. Insulin resistance, which is common in obesity and is a component of syndrome X (or the metabolic syndrome), is also thought to contribute to hypertension. One review suggests that sugar may play an important role in hypertension and salt is just an innocent bystander.

Events in early life, such as low birth weight, maternal smoking, and lack of breastfeeding may be risk factors for adult essential hypertension, although the mechanisms linking these exposures to adult hypertension remain unclear. An increased rate of high blood urea has been found in untreated people with hypertensive in comparison with people with normal blood pressure, although it is uncertain whether the former plays a causal role or is subsidiary to poor kidney function. Average blood pressure may be higher in the winter than in the summer.

Secondary hypertension results from an identifiable cause. Kidney disease is the most common secondary cause of hypertension. Hypertension can also be caused by endocrine conditions, such as Cushing's syndrome, hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, acromegaly, Conn's syndrome or hyperaldosteronism, renal artery stenosis (from atherosclerosis or fibromuscular dysplasia), hyperparathyroidism, and pheochromocytoma. Other causes of secondary hypertension include obesity, sleep apnea, pregnancy, coarctation of the aorta, excessive eating of liquorice, excessive drinking of alcohol, and certain prescription medicines, herbal remedies, and illegal drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamine. Arsenic exposure through drinking water has been shown to correlate with elevated blood pressure.

Exercise hypertension is an excessive rise in blood pressure during exercise. Many of those with exercise hypertension have spikes in systolic pressure to 250 mmHg or greater.

A rise in systolic blood pressure to over 200 mmHg when exercising at 100 W is pathological and a rise in pressure over 220 mmHg needs to be controlled by the appropriate drugs.

Similarly, in healthy individuals the response of the diastolic pressure to 'dynamic' exercise (e.g. walking, running or jogging) of moderate intensity is to remain constant or to fall slightly (due to the improved blood flow), but in some individuals a rise of 10 mmHg or greater is found.

Recent work at Johns Hopkins involving a group of athletes aged 55 to 75 with mild hypertension has found a correlation of those with exercise hypertension to a reduced ability of the major blood vessels to change in size in response to increased blood flow (probably due to impaired function of the endothelial cells in the vessel walls). This is to be differentiated from stiffness of the blood-vessel walls, which was not found to be correlated with the effect.

Prognosis of individuals with renovascular hypertension is not easy to determine. Those with atherosclerotic renal artery disease have a high risk of mortality, furthermore those who also have renal dysfunction have a higher mortality risk.

However, the majority of renovascular diseases can be improved with surgery.

According to JNC 7, BP goals should be as follows :

- Less than 140/90mm Hg in patients with uncomplicated hypertension

- Less than 130/85mm Hg in patients with diabetes and those with renal disease with less than 1g/24-hour proteinuria

- Less than 125/75mm Hg in patients with renal disease and more than 1 g/24-hour proteinuria

The medical care of patients with hypertensive heart disease falls under 2 categories—

- Treatment of hypertension

- Prevention (and, if present, treatment) of heart failure or other cardiovascular disease

In terms of treatment for renovascular hypertension surgical revascularization versus medical therapy for atherosclerosis, it is not clear if one option is better than the other according to a 2014 Cochrane review; balloon angioplasty did show a small improvement in blood pressure .

Surgery can include percutaneous surgical revascularization, and also nephrectomy or autotransplantation, and the individual may be given beta-adrenergic blockers. Early therapeutic intervention is important if ischemic nephropathy is to be prevented. Inpatient care is necessary for the management of hypertensive urgencies, quick intervention is required to prevent further damage to the kidneys.

A treatment plan may involve lactulose, enemas, and use of antibiotics such as rifaximin, neomycin, vancomycin, and the quinolones. Restriction of dietary protein was recommended but this is now refuted by a clinical trial which shows no benefit. Instead, the maintenance of adequate nutrition is now advocated.

Certain medications, including NSAIDs (Motrin/Ibuprofen) and steroids can cause hypertension. Other medications include extrogens (such as those found in oral contraceptives with high estrogenic activity), certain antidepressants (such as venlafaxine), buspirone, carbamazepine, bromocriptine, clozapine, and cyclosporine.

High blood pressure that is associated with the sudden withdrawal of various antihypertensive medications is called rebound hypertension. The increases in blood pressure may result in blood pressures greater than when the medication was initiated. Depending on the severity of the increase in blood pressure, rebound hypertension may result in a hypertensive emergency. Rebound hypertension is avoided by gradually reducing the dose (also known as "dose tapering"), thereby giving the body enough time to adjust to reduction in dose. Medications commonly associated with rebound hypertension include centrally-acting antihypertensive agents, such as clonidine and methyl-dopa.

Other herbal or "natural products" which have been associated with hypertension include ma huang, St John's wort, and licorice.

In general, individuals with white coat hypertension have lower morbidity than patients with sustained hypertension, but higher morbidity than the clinically normotensive.

However, it should be remembered that all the established published trials on the consequences of high blood pressure and the benefits of treating are based on one-time measurement in clinical settings rather than the generally slightly lower readings obtained from ambulatory recordings.

The debate and conflicting ideas revolve around whether or not it would be feasible to treat white coat hypertension, as there still is no conclusive evidence that a temporary rise in blood pressure during office visits has an adverse effect on health.

In fact, many cross sectional studies have shown that "target-organ damage (as exemplified by left ventricular hypertrophy) is less in white-coat hypertensive patients than in sustained hypertensive patients even after the allowance has been made for differences in clinic pressure". Many believe that patients with "white coat" hypertension do not require even very small doses of antihypertensive therapy as it may result in hypotension, but must still be careful as patients may show signs of vascular changes and may eventually develop hypertension. Even patients with established hypertension that is well-controlled based on home blood pressure monitoring may experience elevated readings during office visits.

The management of ascites needs to be gradual to avoid sudden changes in systemic volume status which can precipitate hepatic encephalopathy, renal failure and death. The management includes salt restriction, diuretics (spironolactone), paracentesis, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt.

Many pathways are involved in the abnormal proliferation and contraction of the smooth muscle cells of the pulmonary arteries in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Three of these pathways are important since they have been targeted with drugs — endothelin receptor antagonists, phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE-5) inhibitors, and prostacyclin derivatives.

Treatment of pulmonary hypertension is determined by whether the PH is arterial, venous, hypoxic, thromboembolic, or miscellaneous. The treatment is to optimize left ventricular function by the use of diuretics, digoxins, blood thinners, or to repair/replace the mitral valve or aortic valve. Patients with left heart failure or hypoxemic lung diseases (groups II or III pulmonary hypertension) should not routinely be treated with vasoactive agents including prostanoids, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, or endothelin antagonists, as these are approved for the different condition called pulmonary arterial hypertension. To make the distinction, doctors at a minimum will conduct cardiac catheterization of the right heart, echocardiography, chest CT, a six-minute walk test, and pulmonary function testing. Using treatments for other kinds of pulmonary hypertension in patients with these conditions can harm the patient and wastes substantial medical resources.

High dose calcium channel blockers are useful in only 5% of IPAH patients who are "vasoreactive" by Swan-Ganz catheter. Unfortunately, calcium channel blockers have been largely misused, being prescribed to many patients with non-vasoreactive PAH, leading to excess morbidity and mortality. The criteria for vasoreactivity have changed. Only those patients whose "mean" pulmonary artery pressure falls by more than 10 mm Hg to less than 40 mm Hg with an unchanged or increased cardiac output when challenged with adenosine, epoprostenol, or nitric oxide are considered vasoreactive. Of these, only half of the patients are responsive to calcium channel blockers in the long term.

A number of agents have recently been introduced for primary and secondary PAH. The trials supporting the use of these agents have been relatively small, and the only measure consistently used to compare their effectivity is the "6 minute walk test". Many have no data on mortality benefit or time to progression.

Despite increasing incidence of HFpEF effective inroads to therapeutics have been largely unsuccessful. Currently, recommendations for treatment are directed at symptom relief and co-morbid conditions. Frequently this involves administration of diuretics to relieve complications associated with volume overload, such as leg swelling and high blood pressure.

Commonly encountered conditions that must be treated for and have independent recommendations for standard of care include atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. There are particular factors unique to HFpEF that must be accounted for with therapy. Unfortunately, currently available randomized clinical trials addressing the therapeutic adventure for these conditions in HFpEF present conflicting or limited evidence.

Specific aspects of therapeutics should be avoided in HFpEF to prevent the deterioration of the condition. Considerations that are generalizable to heart failure include avoidance of a fast heart rate, elevations in blood pressure, development of ischemia, and atrial fibrillation. More specific to HFpEF include avoidance of preload reduction. As patients display normal ejection fraction but reduced cardiac output they are especially sensitive to changes in preloading and may rapidly display signs of output failure. This means administration of diuretics and vasodilators must be monitored carefully.

HFrEF and HFpEF represent distinct entities in terms of development and effective therapeutic management. Specifically cardiac resynchronization, administration of beta blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors are applied to good effect in HFrEF but are largely ineffective at reducing morbidity and mortality in HFpEF. Many of these therapies are effective in reducing the extent of cardiac dilation and increasing ejection fraction in HFrEF patients. It is unsurprising they fail to effect improvement in HFpEF patients, given their un-dilated phenotype and relative normal ejection fraction. Understanding and targeting mechanisms unique to HFpEF are thus essential to the development of therapeutics.

Randomized studies on HFpEF patients have shown that exercise improves left ventricular diastolic function, the heart's ability to relax, and is associated with improved aerobic exercise capacity. The benefit patients seem to derive from exercise does not seem to be a direct cardiac effect but rather is due to changes in peripheral vasculature and skeletal muscle, which show abnormalities in HFpEF patients.

Patients should be regularly assessed to determine progression of the condition, response to interventions, and need for alteration of therapy. Ability to perform daily tasks, hemodynamic status, kidney function, electrolyte balance, and serum natriuretic peptide levels are important parameters. Behavioral management is important in these patients and it is recommended that individuals with HFpEF avoid alcohol, smoking, and high sodium intake.

Few women of childbearing age have high blood pressure, up to 11% develop hypertension of pregnancy. While generally benign, it may herald three complications of pregnancy: pre-eclampsia, HELLP syndrome and eclampsia. Follow-up and control with medication is therefore often necessary.

As previously stated, management of HFpEF is primarily dependent on the treatment of symptoms and exacerbating conditions. Currently treatment with ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, beta blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers are employed but do not have a proven benefit in HFpEF patients. Additionally, use of Diuretics or other therapies that can alter loading conditions or blood pressure should be used with caution. It is not recommended that patients be treated with phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors or digoxin.

Antimineralocorticoid is currently recommended for patients with HFpEF who show elevated brain natriuretic peptide levels. Spironolactone is the first member of this drug class and the most frequently employed. Care should be taken to monitor serum potassium levels as well as kidney function, specifically glomerular filtration rate during treatment.

Beta blockers play a rather obscure role in HFpEF treatment but appear to play a beneficial role in patient management. There is currently a deficit of clinical evidence to support a particular benefit for HFpEF patients, with most evidence resulting from HFpEF patients' inclusion in broader heart failure trials. However, some evidence suggests that vasodilating beta blockers, such as nebivolol, can provide a benefit for patients with heart failure regardless of ejection fraction. Additionally, because of the chronotropic perturbation and diminished LV filling seen in HFpEF the bradycardic effect of beta blockers may enable improved filling, reduced myocardial oxygen demand and lowered blood pressure. However, this effect also can contribute to diminished response to exercise demands and can result in an excessive reduction in heart rate.

ACE inhibitors do not appear to improve morbidity or mortality associated with HFpEF alone. However, they are important in the management of hypertension, a significant player in the pathophysiology of HFpEF.

Angiotensin II receptor blocker treatment shows an improvement in diastolic dysfunction and hypertension that is comparable to other anti-hypertensive medication.

It is the goal of evolutionary medicine to find treatments for diseases that are informed by the evolutionary history of a disease. It has been suggested that gestational hypertension is linked to insulin resistance during pregnancy. Both the increase in blood sugar that can lead to gestational diabetes and the increase in blood pressure that can lead to gestational hypertension are mechanisms that mean to optimize the amount of nutrients that can be passed from maternal tissue to fetal tissue. It has been suggested that techniques used to combat insulin insensitivity might also prove beneficial to those suffering from gestational hypertension. Measures to avoid insulin resistance include avoiding obesity before pregnancy, minimizing weight gain during pregnancy, eating foods with low glycemic indexes, and exercising.

Many factors influence the time course and extent of remodeling, including the severity of the injury, secondary events (recurrent ischemia or infarction), neurohormonal activation, genetic factors and gene expression, and treatment. Medications may attenuate remodeling. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have been consistently shown to decrease remodeling in animal models or transmural infarction and chronic pressure overload. Clinical trials have shown that ACE inhibitor therapy after myocardial infarction leads to improved myocardial performance, improved ejection fraction, and decreased mortality compared to patients treated with placebo. Likewise, inhibition of aldosterone, either directly or indirectly, leads to improvement in remodeling. Carvedilol, a 3rd generation beta blocker, may actually reverse the remodeling process by reducing left ventricular volumes and improving systolic function. Early correction of congenital heart defects, if appropriate, may prevent remodeling, as will treatment of chronic hypertension or valvular heart disease. Often, reverse remodeling, or improvement in left ventricular function, will also be seen.

As an overall medical condition PVCs are normally not very harmful to patients that experience them, but frequent PVCs may put patients at increased risk of developing arrhythmias or cardiomyopathy, which can greatly impact the functioning of the heart over the span of that patient's life. On a more serious and severe scale, frequent PVCs can accompany underlying heart disease and lead to chaotic, dangerous heart rhythms and possibly sudden cardiac death.

Asymptomatic patients that do not have heart disease have long-term prognoses very similar to the general population, but asymptomatic patients that have ejection fractions greater than 40% have a 3.5% incidence of sustained ventricular tachycardia or cardiac arrest. One drawback comes from emerging data that suggests very frequent ventricular ectopy may be associated with cardiomyopathy through a mechanism thought to be similar to that of chronic right ventricular pacing associated cardiomyopathy. Patients that have underlying chronic structural heart disease and complex ectopy, mortality is significantly increased.

In meta-analysis of 11 studies, people with frequent PVC (≥1 time during a standard electrocardiographic recording or ≥30 times over a 1-hour recording) had risk of cardiac death 2 times higher than persons without frequent PVC. Although most studies made attempts to exclude high-risk subjects, such as those with histories of cardiovascular disease, they did not test participants for underlying structural heart disease.

In a study of 239 people with frequent PVCs (>1000 beats/day) and without structural heart disease (i.e. in the presence of normal heart function) there were no serious cardiac events through 5.6 years on average, but there was correlation between PVC prevalence and decrease of ejection fraction and increase of left ventricular diastolic dimension. In this study absence of heart of disease was excluded by echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in 63 persons and Holter monitoring.

Another study has suggested that in the absence of structural heart disease even frequent (> 60/h or 1/min) and complex PVCs are associated with a benign prognosis. It was study of 70 people followed by 6.5 years on average. Healthy status was confirmed by extensive noninvasive cardiologic examination, although cardiac catheterization of a subgroup disclosed serious coronary artery disease in 19%. Overall survival was better than expected.

On the other hand, the Framingham Heart Study reported that PVCs in apparently healthy people were associated with a twofold increase in the risk of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and cardiac death. In men with coronary heart disease and in women with or without coronary heart disease, complex or frequent arrhythmias were not associated with an increased risk. The at-risk people might have subclinical coronary disease. These Framingham results have been criticised for the lack of rigorous measures to exclude the potential confounder of underlying heart disease.

In the ARIC study of 14,783 people followed for 15 to 17 years those with detected PVC during 2 minute ECG, and without hypertension or diabetes on the beginning, had risk of stroke increased by 109%. Hypertension or diabetes, both risk factors for stroke, did not change significantly risk of stroke for people with PVC. It is possible that PVCs identified those at risk of stroke with blood pressure and impaired glucose tolerance on a continuum of risk below conventional diagnostic thresholds for hypertension and diabetes. Those in ARIC study with any PVC had risk of heart failure increased by 63% and were >2 times as likely to die due to coronary heart disease (CHD). Risk was also higher for people with or without baseline CHD.

In the Niigata study of 63,386 people with 10-year follow-up period those with PVC during a 10-second recording had risk of atrial fibrillation increased nearly 3 times independently from risk factors: age, male sex, body mass index, hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and diabetes.

Reducing frequent PVC (>20%) by antiarrhythmic drugs or by catheter ablation significantly improves heart performance.

Recent studies have shown that those subjects who have an extremely high occurrence of PVCs (several thousand a day) can develop dilated cardiomyopathy. In these cases, if the PVCs are reduced or removed (for example, via ablation therapy) the cardiomyopathy usually regresses.

Also, PVCs can permanently cease without any treatment, in a material percentage of cases.

A systematic review estimated that inactivity is responsible for 6% of the burden of disease from coronary heart disease worldwide. The authors estimated that 121,000 deaths from coronary heart disease could have been averted in Europe in 2008, if physical inactivity had been removed. A Cochrane review found some evidence that yoga has favourable effects on blood pressure and cholesterol, but studies included in this review were of low quality.

White coat hypertension, more commonly known as white coat syndrome, is a phenomenon in which patients exhibit a blood pressure level above the normal range, in a clinical setting, though they don't exhibit it in other settings. It is believed that the phenomenon is due to anxiety that those afflicted experience during a clinic visit.

The patient's daytime ambulatory blood pressure is used as a reference as it takes into account ordinary levels of daily stress. Many problems have been incurred in the diagnosis and treatment of white coat hypertension.

The term "masked hypertension" can be used to describe the contrasting phenomenon, where a patient's blood pressure is above the normal range during daily living, although it isn't above the normal range when the patient is in a clinic setting.