Literature DB >> 10752701

Risks of untreated and treated isolated systolic hypertension in the elderly: meta-analysis of outcome trials.

J A Staessen1, J Gasowski, J G Wang, L Thijs, E Den Hond, J P Boissel, J Coope, T Ekbom, F Gueyffier, L Liu, K Kerlikowske, S Pocock, R H Fagard.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analysis of outcome trials in hypertension have not specifically focused on isolated systolic hypertension or they have explained treatment benefit mainly in function of the achieved diastolic blood pressure reduction. We therefore undertook a quantitative overview of the trials to further evaluate the risks associated with systolic blood pressure in treated and untreated older patients with isolated systolic hypertension
METHODS: Patients were 60 years old or more. Systolic blood pressure was 160 mm Hg or greater and diastolic blood pressure was less than 95 mm Hg. We used non-parametric methods and Cox regression to model the risks associated with blood pressure and to correct for regression dilution bias. We calculated pooled effects of treatment from stratified 2 x 2 contingency tables after application of Zelen's test of heterogeneity.
FINDINGS: In eight trials 15 693 patients with isolated systolic hypertension were followed up for 3.8 years (median). After correction for regression dilution bias, sex, age, and diastolic blood pressure, the relative hazard rates associated with a 10 mm Hg higher initial systolic blood pressure were 1.26 (p=0.0001) for total mortality, 1.22 (p=0.02) for stroke, but only 1.07 (p=0.37) for coronary events. Independent of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure was inversely correlated with total mortality, highlighting the role of pulse pressure as risk factor. Active treatment reduced total mortality by 13% (95% CI 2-22, p=0.02), cardiovascular mortality by 18%, all cardiovascular complications by 26%, stroke by 30%, and coronary events by 23%. The number of patients to treat for 5 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event was lower in men (18 vs 38), at or above age 70 (19 vs 39), and in patients with previous cardiovascular complications (16 vs 37).
INTERPRETATION: Drug treatment is justified in older patients with isolated systolic hypertension whose systolic blood pressure is 160 mm Hg or higher. Absolute benefit is larger in men, in patients aged 70 or more and in those with previous cardiovascular complications or wider pulse pressure. Treatment prevented stroke more effectively than coronary events. However, the absence of a relation between coronary events and systolic blood pressure in untreated patients suggests that the coronary protection may have been underestimated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10752701     DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)07330-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  228 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances in the management of hypertension in the elderly.

Authors:  F J Gennari; A S Gennari
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 5.369

Review 2.  Is there a preferred antihypertensive therapy for isolated systolic hypertension and reduced arterial compliance?

Authors:  S S Franklin
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.369

Review 3.  Systolic versus diastolic blood pressure versus pulse pressure.

Authors:  William B White
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  Comparison of usefulness of systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure and pulse pressure as predictors of cardiovascular death in patients >/=60 years of age (The Dubbo Study).

Authors:  Latha Palaniappan; Leon A Simons; Judith Simons; Yechiel Friedlander; John McCallum
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2002-12-15       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Relation between blood pressure after an acute coronary event and subsequent cardiovascular risk.

Authors:  C-K Wong; H D White
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 6.  Recent clinical trial highlights in hypertension.

Authors:  F C Luft
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 5.369

7.  Does Clinical Inertia Vary According to Provider Type?

Authors:  Daniel G Federman; Kirsha S Gordon; Joseph Goulet; Sue Kancir; Woody Levin; Shawn L Fultz; Amy C Justice
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2008

Review 8.  The elderly patients on hemodialysis.

Authors:  S Anand; M Kurella Tamura; G M Chertow
Journal:  Minerva Urol Nefrol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.720

Review 9.  Hypertension in the elderly.

Authors:  M Pestana
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 10.  The Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS): clinical implications for older patients with cerebrovascular disease.

Authors:  Yogini Ratnasabapathy; Carlene M M Lawes; Craig S Anderson
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.