Microwave-based sensing for tissue analysis is recently gaining interest due to advantages such as non-ionizing radiation and non-invasiveness. We have developed a set of transmission sensors for microwave-based real-time sensing to quantify muscle mass and quality. In connection, we verified the sensors by 3D simulations, tested them in a laboratory on a homogeneous three-layer tissue model, and collected pilot clinical data in 20 patients and 25 healthy volunteers. This report focuses on initial sensor designs for the Muscle Analyzer System (MAS), their simulation, laboratory trials and clinical trials followed by developing three new sensors and their performance comparison. In the clinical studies, correlation studies were done to compare MAS performance with other clinical standards, specifically the skeletal muscle index, for muscle mass quantification. The results showed limited signal penetration depth for the Split Ring Resonator (SRR) sensor. New sensors were designed incorporating Substrate Integrated Waveguides (SIW) and a bandstop filter to overcome this problem. The sensors were validated through 3D simulations in which they showed increased penetration depth through tissue when compared to the SRR. The second-generation sensors offer higher penetration depth which will improve clinical data collection and validation. The bandstop filter is fabricated and studied in a group of volunteers, showing more reliable data that warrants further continuation of this development.

Background: The leading global risk factor for cardiovascular-disease-related morbidity and mortality is hypertension. In the past decade, attention has been paid to increase females’ representation. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the representation of females and presentation of sex-stratified data in studies investigating the effect of antihypertensive drugs has increased over the past decades. Methods: After systematically searching PubMed and Embase for studies evaluating the effect of the five major antihypertensive medication groups until May 2020, a scoping review was performed. The primary outcome was the proportion of included females. The secondary outcome was whether sex stratification was performed. Results: The search resulted in 73,867 articles. After the selection progress, 2046 studies were included for further analysis. These studies included 1,348,172 adults with a mean percentage of females participating of 38.1%. Female participation in antihypertensive studies showed an increase each year by 0.2% (95% CI 0.36–0.52), p < 0.01). Only 75 (3.7%) studies performed sex stratification, and this was the highest between 2011 and 2020 (7.2%). Conclusion: Female participation showed a slight increase in the past decade but is still underrepresented compared to males. As data are infrequently sex-stratified, more attention is needed to possible sex-related differences in treatment effects to different antihypertensive compounds.

published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User

Aims: In the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, early recognition and adequate treatment of hypertension are of leading importance. However, the efficacy of antihypertensives may be depending on sex disparities. Our objective was to evaluate and quantify the sex-diverse effects of beta-blockers (BB) on hypertension and cardiac function. We focussed on comparing hypertensive female versus male individuals. Methods and results: A systematic search was performed for studies on BBs from inception to May 2020. A total of 66 studies were included that contained baseline and follow up measurements on blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and cardiac function. Data also had to be stratified for sex. Mean differences were calculated using a random-effects model. In females as compared to males, BB treatment decreased systolic BP 11.1 mmHg (95% CI, −14.5; −7.8) vs. 11.1 mmHg (95% CI, −14.0; −8.2), diastolic BP 8.0 mmHg (95% CI, −10.6; −5.3) vs. 8.0 mmHg (95% CI, −10.1; −6.0), and HR 10.8 beats per minute (bpm) (95% CI, −17.4; −4.2) vs. 9.8 bpm (95% CI, −11.1; −8.4)), respectively, in both sexes’ absolute and relative changes comparably. Left ventricular ejection fraction increased only in males (3.7% (95% CI, 0.6; 6.9)). Changes in left ventricular mass and cardiac output (CO) were only reported in males and changed −20.6 g (95% CI, −56.3; 15.1) and −0.1 L (95% CI, −0.5; 0.2), respectively. Conclusions: BBs comparably lowered BP and HR in both sexes. The lack of change in CO in males suggests that the reduction in BP is primarily due to a decrease in vascular resistance. Furthermore, females were underrepresented compared to males. We recommend that future research should include more females and sex-stratified data when researching the treatment effects of hypertensives.

Background Hypertension is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and is the most substantial and neglected health burden in women. While treatment of high blood pressure is essential in the global prevention strategies of CVD it is assumed that effectiveness of pharmacological treatment may be hampered by sex differences. However, it is still not known whether sex differences exist in the effect of the antihypertensive medications. Purpose To evaluate sex-stratified effects for angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on blood pressure (BP) and cardiac function in female compared to male hypertensive participants. Methods A series of systematic reviews and meta-analysis was performed. PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched for studies evaluating the effects of the five major groups of antihypertensive medication from 1945 to May 2020. Randomized control trials and observational studies in humans (≥18 years) were included investigating beta-blockers (BB), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), calcium channel blockers (CCB), and diuretics. In this study data on ARB's was analyzed. Studies had to present both baseline and follow-up measurements of at least one of the outcome variables of interest and present their data in a sex-stratified manner. Data on BPand cardiac function where retrieved from studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results The search strategy resulted in 73,867 hits. After first screening based on title and abstract, 15,130 articles where suitable for full test screening. After excluding all studies that matched the exclusion criteria, 205 studies with 15,570 participants where eligible for analysis for the five antihypertensive drugs. Studies investigating ARB's (n=17) where used in this review. Seven trials (41%) had a low risk of bias. ARB decreased BP significantly and comparably in both women and men. Systolic BP −18.2 mmHg (95% CI, −24.8 to −11.5) vs −20.1 mmHg (95% CI, −26.7 to −13.6) and diastolic BP −11.6 mmHg (95% CI, −14.7 to −8.4) vs −12.3 mmHg (95% CI, −16.4 to −8.1). LVEF did not change significantly in either group. LV mass was only reported in males and did not change significantly −11.8 g (95% CI, −25.6 to 1.9). Conclusion Our meta-analysis shows that based on the current studies, no sex differences exists in the effect of ARB on blood pressure or cardiac function. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.