Sripal Bangalore1, Bora Toklu2, Eugenia Gianos3, Arthur Schwartzbard3, Howard Weintraub3, Gbenga Ogedegbe3, Franz H Messerli4. 1. Division of Cardiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY. Electronic address: sripalbangalore@gmail.com. 2. Division of Cardiology, Mount Sinai Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, NY. 3. Division of Cardiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY. 4. Division of Cardiology, University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland; Division of Cardiology, Mount Sinai, Icahn School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal on-treatment blood pressure (BP) target has been a matter of debate. The recent SPRINT trial showed significant benefits of a BP target of <120 mm Hg, albeit with an increase in serious adverse effects related to low BP. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized trials comparing treating with different BP targets. Trial arms were grouped into 5 systolic BP target categories: 1) <160 mm Hg, 2) <150 mm Hg, 3) <140 mm Hg, 4) <130 mm Hg, and 5) <120 mm Hg. Efficacy outcomes of stroke, myocardial infarction, death, cardiovascular death, heart failure, and safety outcomes of serious adverse effects were evaluated using a network meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seventeen trials that enrolled 55,163 patients with 204,103 patient-years of follow-up were included. There was a significant decrease in stroke (rate ratio [RR] 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-1.00) and myocardial infarction (RR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00) with systolic BP <120 mm Hg (vs <160 mm Hg). Sensitivity analysis using achieved systolic BP showed a 72%, 97%, and 227% increase in stroke with systolic BP of <140 mm Hg, <150 mm Hg, and <160 mm, respectively, when compared with systolic BP <120 mm Hg. There was no difference in death, cardiovascular death, or heart failure when comparing any of the BP targets. However, the point estimate favored lower BP targets (<120 mm Hg, <130 mm Hg) when compared with higher BP targets (<140 mm Hg or <150 mm Hg). BP targets of <120 mm Hg and <130 mm Hg ranked #1 and #2, respectively, as the most efficacious target. There was a significant increase in serious adverse effects with systolic BP <120 mm Hg vs <150 mm Hg (RR 1.83; 95% CI, 1.05-3.20) or vs <140 mm Hg (RR 2.12; 95% CI, 1.46-3.08). BP targets of <140 mm Hg and <150 mm Hg ranked #1 and #2, respectively, as the safest target for the outcome of serious adverse effects. Cluster plots for combined efficacy and safety showed that a systolic BP target of <130 mm Hg had optimal balance between efficacy and safety. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hypertension, a on-treatment systolic BP target of <130 mm Hg achieved optimal balance between efficacy and safety.
BACKGROUND: The optimal on-treatment blood pressure (BP) target has been a matter of debate. The recent SPRINT trial showed significant benefits of a BP target of <120 mm Hg, albeit with an increase in serious adverse effects related to low BP. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized trials comparing treating with different BP targets. Trial arms were grouped into 5 systolic BP target categories: 1) <160 mm Hg, 2) <150 mm Hg, 3) <140 mm Hg, 4) <130 mm Hg, and 5) <120 mm Hg. Efficacy outcomes of stroke, myocardial infarction, death, cardiovascular death, heart failure, and safety outcomes of serious adverse effects were evaluated using a network meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seventeen trials that enrolled 55,163 patients with 204,103 patient-years of follow-up were included. There was a significant decrease in stroke (rate ratio [RR] 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-1.00) and myocardial infarction (RR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00) with systolic BP <120 mm Hg (vs <160 mm Hg). Sensitivity analysis using achieved systolic BP showed a 72%, 97%, and 227% increase in stroke with systolic BP of <140 mm Hg, <150 mm Hg, and <160 mm, respectively, when compared with systolic BP <120 mm Hg. There was no difference in death, cardiovascular death, or heart failure when comparing any of the BP targets. However, the point estimate favored lower BP targets (<120 mm Hg, <130 mm Hg) when compared with higher BP targets (<140 mm Hg or <150 mm Hg). BP targets of <120 mm Hg and <130 mm Hg ranked #1 and #2, respectively, as the most efficacious target. There was a significant increase in serious adverse effects with systolic BP <120 mm Hg vs <150 mm Hg (RR 1.83; 95% CI, 1.05-3.20) or vs <140 mm Hg (RR 2.12; 95% CI, 1.46-3.08). BP targets of <140 mm Hg and <150 mm Hg ranked #1 and #2, respectively, as the safest target for the outcome of serious adverse effects. Cluster plots for combined efficacy and safety showed that a systolic BP target of <130 mm Hg had optimal balance between efficacy and safety. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hypertension, a on-treatment systolic BP target of <130 mm Hg achieved optimal balance between efficacy and safety.
Authors: Catherine G Derington; Jordan B King; Kelsey B Bryant; Blake T McGee; Andrew E Moran; William S Weintraub; Brandon K Bellows; Adam P Bress Journal: Curr Hypertens Rep Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 5.369
Authors: Paul Muntner; Robert M Carey; Samuel Gidding; Daniel W Jones; Sandra J Taler; Jackson T Wright; Paul K Whelton Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Paul Muntner; Robert M Carey; Samuel Gidding; Daniel W Jones; Sandra J Taler; Jackson T Wright; Paul K Whelton Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daniel T Lackland; Robert M Carey; Adriana B Conforto; Clive Rosendorff; Paul K Whelton; Philip B Gorelick Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 7.914