For most patients, health care providers diagnose high blood pressure when blood pressure readings are consistently 140/90 mmHg or above. A blood pressure test can be done in a health care provider’s office or clinic. To track blood pressure readings over a period of time, the health care provider may ask the patient to come into the office on different days and at different times. The health care provider also may ask the patient to check readings at home or at other locations that have blood pressure equipment and to keep a written log of results. The health care provider usually takes 2–3 readings at several medical appointments to diagnose high blood pressure. Using the results of the blood pressure test, the health care provider will diagnose prehypertension or high blood pressure if:

- For an adult, systolic or diastolic readings are consistently higher than 120/80 mmHg.

- A child’s blood pressure numbers are outside average numbers for children of the same age, gender, and height.

Once the health care provider determines the severity, he or she can order additional tests to determine if the blood pressure is due to other conditions or medicines or if there is primary high blood pressure. Health care providers can use this information to develop a treatment plan.

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.

In people aged 18 years or older hypertension is defined as a systolic or a diastolic blood pressure measurement consistently higher than an accepted normal value (this is above 129 or 139 mmHg systolic, 89 mmHg diastolic depending on the guideline). Other thresholds are used (135 mmHg systolic or 85 mmHg diastolic) if measurements are derived from 24-hour ambulatory or home monitoring. Recent international hypertension guidelines have also created categories below the hypertensive range to indicate a continuum of risk with higher blood pressures in the normal range. The "Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure" (JNC7) published in 2003 uses the term prehypertension for blood pressure in the range 120–139 mmHg systolic or 80–89 mmHg diastolic, while European Society of Hypertension Guidelines (2007) and British Hypertension Society (BHS) IV (2004) use optimal, normal and high normal categories to subdivide pressures below 140 mmHg systolic and 90 mmHg diastolic. Hypertension is also sub-classified: JNC7 distinguishes hypertension stage I, hypertension stage II, and isolated systolic hypertension. Isolated systolic hypertension refers to elevated systolic pressure with normal diastolic pressure and is common in the elderly. The ESH-ESC Guidelines (2007) The results also demonstrated a correlation of chronically low vitamin D levels with a higher chance of becoming hypertensive. Supplementation with vitamin D over 18 months in normotensive individuals with vitamin D deficiency did not significantly affect blood pressure.

Hypertension is diagnosed on the basis of a persistently high resting blood pressure. Traditionally, the National Institute of Clinical Excellence recommends three separate resting sphygmomanometer measurements at monthly intervals. The American Heart Association recommends at least three resting measurements on at least two separate health care visits.

For an accurate diagnosis of hypertension to be made, it is essential for proper blood pressure measurement technique to be used. Improper measurement of blood pressure is common and can change the blood pressure reading by up to 10 mmHg, which can lead to misdiagnosis and misclassification of hypertension. Correct blood pressure measurement technique involves several steps. Proper blood pressure measurement requires the person whose blood pressure is being measured to sit quietly for at least five minutes which is then followed by application of a properly fitted blood pressure cuff to a bare upper arm. The person should be seated with their back supported, feet flat on the floor, and with their legs uncrossed. The person whose blood pressure is being measured should avoid talking or moving during this process. The arm being measured should be supported on a flat surface at the level of the heart. Blood pressure measurement should be done in a quiet room so the medical professional checking the blood pressure can hear the Korotkoff sounds while listening to the brachial artery with a stethoscope for accurate blood pressure measurements. The blood pressure cuff should be deflated slowly (2-3 mmHg per second) while listening for the Korotkoff sounds. The bladder should be emptied before a person's blood pressure is measured since this can increase blood pressure by up to 15/10 mmHg. Multiple blood pressure readings (at least two) spaced 1-2 minutes apart should be obtained to ensure accuracy. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring over 12 to 24 hours is the most accurate method to confirm the diagnosis.

An exception to this is those with very high blood pressure readings especially when there is poor organ function. Initial assessment of the hypertensive people should include a complete history and physical examination. With the availability of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitors and home blood pressure machines, the importance of not wrongly diagnosing those who have white coat hypertension has led to a change in protocols. In the United Kingdom, current best practice is to follow up a single raised clinic reading with ambulatory measurement, or less ideally with home blood pressure monitoring over the course of 7 days. The United States Preventative Services Task Force also recommends getting measurements outside of the healthcare environment. Pseudohypertension in the elderly or noncompressibility artery syndrome may also require consideration. This condition is believed to be due to calcification of the arteries resulting in abnormally high blood pressure readings with a blood pressure cuff while intra arterial measurements of blood pressure are normal. Orthostatic hypertension is when blood pressure increases upon standing.

Once the diagnosis of hypertension has been made, healthcare providers should attempt to identify the underlying cause based on risk factors and other symptoms, if present. Secondary hypertension is more common in preadolescent children, with most cases caused by kidney disease. Primary or essential hypertension is more common in adolescents and has multiple risk factors, including obesity and a family history of hypertension. Laboratory tests can also be performed to identify possible causes of secondary hypertension, and to determine whether hypertension has caused damage to the heart, eyes, and kidneys. Additional tests for diabetes and high cholesterol levels are usually performed because these conditions are additional risk factors for the development of heart disease and may require treatment.

Serum creatinine is measured to assess for the presence of kidney disease, which can be either the cause or the result of hypertension. Serum creatinine alone may overestimate glomerular filtration rate and recent guidelines advocate the use of predictive equations such as the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). eGFR can also provide a baseline measurement of kidney function that can be used to monitor for side effects of certain anti-hypertensive drugs on kidney function. Additionally, testing of urine samples for protein is used as a secondary indicator of kidney disease. Electrocardiogram (EKG/ECG) testing is done to check for evidence that the heart is under strain from high blood pressure. It may also show whether there is thickening of the heart muscle (left ventricular hypertrophy) or whether the heart has experienced a prior minor disturbance such as a silent heart attack. A chest X-ray or an echocardiogram may also be performed to look for signs of heart enlargement or damage to the heart.

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.

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.

HFpEF is typically diagnosed with echocardiography. Techniques such as catheterization are invasive procedures and thus reserved for patients with co-morbid conditions or those who are suspected to have HFpEF but lack clear non-invasive findings. Catheterization does represent are more definitive diagnostic assessment as pressure and volume measurements are taken simultaneously and directly. In either technique the heart is evaluated for left ventricular diastolic function. Important parameters include, rate of isovolumic relaxation, rate of ventricular filling, and stiffness.

Frequently patients are subjected to stress echocardiography, which involves the above assessment of diastolic function during exercise. This is undertaken because perturbations in diastole are exaggerated during the increased demands of exercise. Exercise requires increased left ventricular filling and subsequent output. Typically the heart responds by increasing heart rate and relaxation time. However, in patients with HFpEF both responses are diminished due to increased ventricular stiffness. Testing during this demanding state may reveal abnormalities that are not as discernible at rest.

Canadian genetic testing guidelines and recommendations for individuals diagnosed with HCM are as follows:

- The main purpose of genetic testing is for screening family members.

- According to the results, at-risk relatives may be encouraged to undergo extensive testing.

- Genetic testing is not meant for confirming a diagnosis.

- If the diagnosed individual has no relatives that are at risk, then genetic testing is not required.

- Genetic testing is not intended for risk assessment or treatment decisions.

- Evidence only supports clinical testing in predicting the progression and risk of developing complications of HCM.

For individuals "suspected" of having HCM:

- Genetic testing is not recommended for determining other causes of left ventricular hypertrophy (such as "athlete's heart", hypertension, and cardiac amyloidosis).

- HCM may be differentiated from other hypertrophy-causing conditions using clinical history and clinical testing.

Several classes of antihypertensive agents are recommended, with the choice depending on the cause of the hypertensive crisis, the severity of the elevation in blood pressure, and the usual blood pressure of the person before the hypertensive crisis. In most cases, the administration of intravenous sodium nitroprusside injection which has an almost immediate antihypertensive effect, is suitable (but in many cases not readily available). Besides, nitroprusside runs a risk of cyanide poisoning. Other intravenous agents like nitroglycerine, nicardipine, labetalol, fenoldopam or phentolamine can also be used, but all have a delayed onset of action (by several minutes) compared to sodium nitroprusside.

In addition, non-pharmacological treatment could be considered in cases of resistant malignant hypertension due to end stage kidney failure, such as surgical nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephrectomy, and renal artery embolization in cases of anesthesia risk.

It is also important that the blood pressure is lowered smoothly, not too abruptly. The initial goal in hypertensive emergencies is to reduce the pressure by no more than 25% (within minutes to 1 or 2 hours), and then toward a level of 160/100 mm Hg within a total of 2–6 hours. Excessive reduction in blood pressure can precipitate coronary, cerebral, or renal ischemia and, possibly, infarction.

The diagnosis of a hypertensive emergency is not based solely on an absolute level of blood pressure, but also on the typical blood pressure level of the patient before the hypertensive crisis occurs. Individuals with a history of chronic hypertension may not tolerate a "normal" blood pressure.

There are no specific diagnostic criteria for TIC, and it can be difficult to diagnose for a number of reasons. First, in patients presenting with both tachycardia and cardiomyopathy, it can be difficult to distinguish which is the causative agent. Additionally, it can occur in patients with or without underlying structural heart disease. Previously normal left ventricular ejection fraction or left ventricular systolic dysfunction out of proportion to a patient’s underlying cardiac disease can be important clues to possible TIC. The diagnosis of TIC is made after excluding other causes of cardiomyopathy and observing resolution of the left ventricular systolic dysfunction with treatment of the tachycardia.

Specific tests that can be used in the diagnosis and monitoring of TIC include:

- electrocardiography (EKG)

- Continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring (e.g. Holter monitor)

- echocardiography

- Radionuclide imaging

- Endomyocardial biopsy

- Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR)

- N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro BNP)

Cardiac rhythm monitors can be used to diagnose tachyarrhythmias. The most common modality used is an EKG. A continuous rhythm monitor such as a Holter monitor can be used to characterize the frequency of a tachyarrhythmia over a longer period of time. Additionally, some patients may not present to the clinical setting in an abnormal rhythm, and continuous rhythm monitor can be useful to determine if an arrhythmia is present over a longer duration of time.

To assess cardiac structure and function, echocardiography is the most commonly available and utilized modality. In addition to decreased left ventricular ejection fraction, studies indicate that patients with TIC may have a smaller left ventricular end-diastolic dimension compared to patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Radionuclide imaging can be used as a non-invasive test to detect myocardial ischemia. Cardiac MRI has also been used to evaluate patients with possible TIC. Late-gadolinium enhancement on cardiac MRI indicates the presence of fibrosis and scarring, and may be evidence of cardiomyopathy not due to tachycardia. A decline in serial NT-pro BNP with control of tachyarrhythmia indicates reversibility of the cardiomyopathy, which would also suggest TIC.

People with TIC display distinct changes in endomyocardial biopsies. TIC is associated with the infiltration of CD68 macrophages into the myocardium while CD3 T-cells are very rare. Furthermore, patients with TIC display significant fibrosis due to collagen deposition. The distribution of mitochondria has found to be altered as well, with an enrichment at the intercalated discs (EMID-sign).

TIC is likely underdiagnosed due to attribution of the tachyarrhythmia to the cardiomyopathy. Poor control of the tachyarrhythmia can result in worsening of heart failure symptoms and cardiomyopathy. Therefore, it is important to aggressively treat the tachyarrhythmia and monitor patients for resolution of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in cases of suspected TIC.

It is critical to diagnose CRS at an early stage in order to achieve optimal therapeutic efficacy. However, unlike markers of heart damage or stress such as troponin, creatine kinase, natriuretic peptides, reliable markers for acute kidney injury are lacking. Recently, research has found several biomarkers that can be used for early detection of acute kidney injury before serious loss of organ function may occur. Several of these biomarkers include neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), N-acetyl-B-D-glucosaminidase (NAG), Cystatin C, and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) which have been shown to be involved in tubular damage. Other biomarkers that have been shown to be useful include BNP, IL-18, and fatty acid binding protein (FABP). However, there is great variability in the measurement of these biomarkers and their use in diagnosing CRS must be assessed.

Diastolic dysfunction must be differentiated from diastolic heart failure. Diastolic dysfunction can be found in elderly and apparently quite healthy patients. If diastolic dysfunction describes an abnormal mechanical property, diastolic heart failure describes a clinical syndrome. Mathematics describing the relationship between the ratio of Systole to Diastole in accepted terms of End Systolic Volume to End Diastolic Volume implies many mathematical solutions to forward and backward heart failure.

Criteria for diagnosis of diastolic dysfunction or diastolic heart failure remain imprecise. This has made it difficult to conduct valid clinical trials of treatments for diastolic heart failure. The problem is compounded by the fact that systolic and diastolic heart failure commonly coexist when patients present with many ischemic and nonischemic etiologies of heart failure. Narrowly defined, diastolic failure has often been defined as "heart failure with normal systolic function" (i.e. left ventricular ejection fraction of 60% or more). Chagasic heart disease may represent an optimal academic model of diastolic heart failure that spares systolic function.

A patient is said to have diastolic dysfunction if he has signs and symptoms of heart failure but the left ventricular ejection fraction is normal. A second approach is to use an elevated BNP level in the presence of normal ejection fraction to diagnose diastolic heart failure. Concordance of both volumetric and biochemical measurements and markers lends to even stronger terminology regarding scientific/mathematical expression of diastolic heart failure. These are both probably too broad a definition for diastolic heart failure, and this group of patients is more precisely described as having heart failure with normal systolic function. Echocardiography can be used to diagnose diastolic dysfunction but is a limited modality unless it is supplemented by stress imaging. MUGA imaging is an earlier mathematical attempt to distinguish systolic from diastolic heart failure.

No one single echocardiographic parameter can confirm a diagnosis of diastolic heart failure. Multiple echocardiographic parameters have been proposed as sufficiently sensitive and specific, including mitral inflow velocity patterns, pulmonary vein flow patterns, E:A reversal, tissue Doppler measurements, and M-mode echo measurements (i.e. of left atrial size). Algorithms have also been developed which combine multiple echocardiographic parameters to diagnose diastolic heart failure.

There are four basic Echocardiographic patterns of diastolic heart failure, which are graded I to IV:

- The mildest form is called an "abnormal relaxation pattern", or grade I diastolic dysfunction. On the mitral inflow Doppler echocardiogram, there is reversal of the normal E/A ratio. This pattern may develop normally with age in some patients, and many grade I patients will not have any clinical signs or symptoms of heart failure.

- Grade II diastolic dysfunction is called "pseudonormal filling dynamics". This is considered moderate diastolic dysfunction and is associated with elevated left atrial filling pressures. These patients more commonly have symptoms of heart failure, and many have left atrial enlargement due to the elevated pressures in the left heart.

Grade III and IV diastolic dysfunction are called "restrictive filling dynamics". These are both severe forms of diastolic dysfunction, and patients tend to have advanced heart failure symptoms:

- Class III diastolic dysfunction patients will demonstrate reversal of their diastolic abnormalities on echocardiogram when they perform the Valsalva maneuver. This is referred to as "reversible restrictive diastolic dysfunction".

- Class IV diastolic dysfunction patients will not demonstrate reversibility of their echocardiogram abnormalities, and are therefore said to suffer from "fixed restrictive diastolic dysfunction".

The presence of either class III and IV diastolic dysfunction is associated with a significantly worse prognosis. These patients will have left atrial enlargement, and many will have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction that indicates a combination of systolic and diastolic dysfunction.

Imaged volumetric definition of systolic heart performance is commonly accepted as ejection fraction. Volumetric definition of the heart in systole was first described by Adolph Fick as cardiac output. Fick may be readily and inexpensively inverted to cardiac input and injection fraction to mathematically describe diastole. Decline of injection fraction paired with decline of E/A ratio seems a stronger argument in support of a mathematical definition of diastolic heart failure.

Another parameter to assess diastolic function is the , which is the ratio of mitral peak velocity of early filling (E) to early diastolic mitral annular velocity (E'). Diastolic dysfunction is assumed when the E/E' ratio exceed 15.

Severe hypertension is a serious and potentially life-threatening medical condition. It is estimated that people who do not receive appropriate treatment only live an average of about three years after the event.

The morbidity and of hypertensive emergencies depend on the extent of end-organ dysfunction at the time of presentation and the degree to which blood pressure is controlled afterward. With good blood pressure control and medication compliance, the 10-year survival rate of patients with hypertensive crises approaches 70%.

The risks of developing a life-threatening disease affecting the heart or brain increase as the blood flow increases. Commonly, ischemic heart attack and stroke are the causes that lead to death in patients with severe hypertension. It is estimated that for every 20 mm Hg systolic or 10 mm Hg diastolic increase in blood pressures above 115/75 mm Hg, the mortality rate for both ischemic heart disease and stroke doubles.

Several studies have concluded that African Americans have a greater incidence of hypertension and a greater morbidity and mortality from hypertensive disease than non-Hispanic whites. It appears that hypertensive crisis is also more common in African Americans compared with other races.

Although severe hypertension is more common in the elderly, it may occur in children (though very rarely). Also, women have slightly increased risks of developing hypertension crises than do men. The lifetime risk for developing hypertension is 86-90% in females and 81-83% in males.

The following screening tool may be useful to patients and medical professionals in determining the need to take further action to diagnose symptoms:

Diagnosis is typically made via echocardiography. Patients will demonstrate normal systolic function, diastolic dysfunction, and a restrictive filling pattern. 2-dimensional and Doppler studies are necessary to distinguish RCM from constrictive pericarditis. Cardiac MRI and transvenous endomyocardial biopsy may also be necessary in some cases. Reduced QRS voltage on EKG may be an indicator of amyloidosis-induced restrictive cardiomyopathy.

Although pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP) can be estimated on the basis of echocardiography, pressure measurements with a Swan-Ganz catheter inserted through the right side of the heart provide the most definite assessment.[42] Pulmonary hypertension is defined as a mean PAP of at least 25 mm Hg (3300 Pa) at rest, and PAH is defined as precapillary pulmonary hypertension (i.e. mean PAP ≥ 25 mm Hg with pulmonary arterial occlusion pressure [PAOP] ≤ 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance [PVR] > 3 Wood Units). PAOP and PVR cannot be measured directly with echocardiography. Therefore, diagnosis of PAH requires right-sided cardiac catheterization. A Swan-Ganz catheter can also measure the cardiac output; this can be used to calculate the cardiac index, which is far more important in measuring disease severity than the pulmonary arterial pressure.

"Mean" PAP (mPAP) should not be confused with systolic PAP (sPAP), which is often reported on echocardiogram reports. A systolic pressure of 40 mm Hg typically implies a mean pressure of more than 25 mm Hg. Roughly, mPAP = 0.61•sPAP + 2.

For people considered likely to have PAH based on the above tests, the specific associated condition is then determined based on the physical examination, medical/family history and further specific diagnostic tests (for example, serological tests to detect underlying connective tissue disease, HIV infection or hepatitis, ultrasonography to confirm the presence of portal hypertension, echocardiography/cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for congenital heart disease, laboratory tests for schistosomiasis, and high resolution CT for PVOD and pulmonary capillary hemangiomatosis). Routine lung biopsy is discouraged in patients with PAH, because of the risk to the patient and because the findings are unlikely to alter the diagnosis and treatment.

Although HCM may be asymptomatic, affected individuals may present with symptoms ranging from mild to critical heart failure and sudden cardiac death at any point from early childhood to seniority. HCM is the leading cause of sudden cardiac death in young athletes in the United States, and the most common genetic cardiovascular disorder. One study found that the incidence of sudden cardiac death in young competitive athletes declined in the Veneto region of Italy by 89% since the 1982 introduction of routine cardiac screening for athletes, from an unusually high starting rate. As of 2010, however, studies have shown that the incidence of sudden cardiac death, among all people with HCM, has declined to one percent or less. Screen-positive individuals who are diagnosed with cardiac disease are usually told to avoid competitive athletics.

HCM can be detected with an echocardiogram (ECHO) with 80%+ accuracy, which can be preceded by screening with an electrocardiogram (ECG) to test for heart abnormalities. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), considered the gold standard for determining the physical properties of the left ventricular wall, can serve as an alternative screening tool when an echocardiogram provides inconclusive results. For example, the identification of segmental lateral ventricular hypertrophy cannot be accomplished with echocardiography alone. Also, left ventricular hypertrophy may be absent in children under thirteen years of age. This undermines the results of pre-adolescents’ echocardiograms. Researchers, however, have studied asymptomatic carriers of an HCM-causing mutation through the use of CMR and have been able to identify crypts in the interventricular septal tissue in these people. It has been proposed that the formation of these crypts is an indication of myocyte disarray and altered vessel walls that may later result in the clinical expression of HCM. A possible explanation for this is that the typical gathering of family history only focuses on whether sudden death occurred or not. It fails to acknowledge the age at which relatives suffered sudden cardiac death, as well as the frequency of the cardiac events. Furthermore, given the several factors necessary to be considered at risk for sudden cardiac death, while most of the factors do not have strong predictive value individually, there exists ambiguity regarding when to implement special treatment.

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.

No system of diagnostic criteria has been agreed on as the gold standard for heart failure. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends measuring brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) followed by ultrasound of the heart if positive. This is recommended in those with shortness of breath. In those with heart failure who worsen both a BNP and a troponin are recommended to help determine likely outcomes.

An electrocardiogram (ECG/EKG) may be used to identify arrhythmias, ischemic heart disease, right and left ventricular hypertrophy, and presence of conduction delay or abnormalities (e.g. left bundle branch block). Although these findings are not specific to the diagnosis of heart failure a normal ECG virtually excludes left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Generally, diastolic dysfunction is a chronic process. When this chronic condition is well tolerated by an individual, no specific treatment may be indicated. Rather, therapy should be directed at the root cause of the stiff left ventricle, with potential causes and aggravating factors like high blood pressure and diabetes treated appropriately. Conversely (as noted above), diastolic dysfunction tends to be better tolerated if the atrium is able to pump blood into the ventricles in a coordinated fashion. This does not occur in atrial fibrillation (AF), where there is no coordinated atrial activity and the left ventricle loses around 20% of its output. However, in chronic AF and in geriatric patients, AF is better tolerated and the cardiologist must choose between a stable AF at a lower rate and the risk of having an intermittent AF if he pretends to treat AF aggressively with all the thrombo-embolic risk it implies. In the same light, and also as noted above, if the atrial fibrillation persists and is resulting in a rapid heart rate, treatment must be given to slow down that rate. Usually digoxin maintains a stable rhythm. The use of a self-expanding device that attaches to the external surface of the left ventricle has been suggested, yet still awaits FDA approval. When the heart muscle squeezes, energy is loaded into the device, which absorbs the energy and releases it to the left ventricle in the diastolic phase. This helps retain muscle elasticity.

The role of specific treatments for diastolic dysfunction "per se" is as yet unclear. Diuretics can be useful, if these patients develop significant congestion, but patients must be monitored because they frequently develop hypotension.

Beta-blockers are the first-line therapy as they induce bradycardia and give time for ventricles to fill. There is some evidence that calcium channel blocker drugs may be of benefit in reducing ventricular stiffness in some cases (verapamil has the benefit lowering the heart rate). Likewise, treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, such as enalapril, ramipril, and many others, may be of benefit due to their effect on preventing ventricular remodeling but under control to avoid hypotension.

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.

The prognosis for TIC after treatment of the underlying tachyarrhythmia is generally good. Studies show that left ventricular function often improves within 1 month of treatment of the tachyarrhythmia, and normalization of the left ventricular ejection fraction occurs in the majority of patients by 3 to 4 months. In some patients however, recovery of this function can take greater than 1 year or be incomplete. In addition, despite improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction, studies have demonstrated that patients with prior TIC continue to demonstrate signs of negative cardiac remodeling including increased left ventricular end-systolic dimension, end-systolic volume, and end-diastolic volume. Additionally, recurrence of the tachyarrhythmia in patients with a history of TIC has been associated with a rapid decline in left ventricular ejection fraction and more severe cardiomyopathy that their prior presentation, which may be a result of the negative cardiac remodeling. There have also been cases of sudden death in patients with a history of TIC, which may be associated with worse baseline left ventricular dysfunction. Given these risks, routine monitoring with clinic visits, ECG, and echocardiography is recommended.

At present, there is no effective specific treatment available for diabetic cardiomyopathy. Treatment centers around intense glycemic control through diet, oral hypoglycemics and frequently insulin and management of heart failure symptoms. There is a clear correlation between increased glycemia and risk of developing diabetic cardiomyopathy, therefore, keeping glucose concentrations as controlled as possible is paramount. Thiazolidinediones are not recommended in patients with NYHA Class III or IV heart failure secondary to fluid retention.

As with most other heart diseases, ACE inhibitors can also be administered. An analysis of major clinical trials shows that diabetic patients with heart failure benefit from such a therapy to a similar degree as non-diabetics. Similarly, beta blockers are also common in the treatment of heart failure concurrently with ACE inhibitors.