Wilbert S Aronow1, Tatyana A Shamliyan2. 1. Department of Medicine, Westchester Medical Center, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA. 2. Quality Assurance, Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Elsevier, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines vary in determining optimal blood pressure targets in adults with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov in March 2018; conducted random effects frequentist meta-analyses of direct aggregate data; and appraised the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: From eligible 14 meta-analyses and 95 publications of randomized controlled trials (RCT), only 6 RCTs directly compared lower versus higher blood pressure targets; remaining RCTs aimed at comparative effectiveness of hypotensive drugs. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP), direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive target SBP <120-140 mmHg decreases the risk of diabetes-related mortality [relative risk (RR) =0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.92], fatal (RR =0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.84) or nonfatal stroke (RR =0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83), prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, macroalbuminuria, and non-spine bone fractures, with no differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or falls. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mmHg, direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive DBP target ≤80 versus 80-90 mmHg decreases the risk of major cardiovascular events. Published meta-analyses of aggregate data suggested a significant association between lower baseline and attained blood pressure and increased cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that in adults with diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension, in order to reduce the risk of stroke, clinicians should target blood pressure at 120-130/80 mmHg, with close monitoring for all drug-related harms.
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines vary in determining optimal blood pressure targets in adults with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov in March 2018; conducted random effects frequentist meta-analyses of direct aggregate data; and appraised the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: From eligible 14 meta-analyses and 95 publications of randomized controlled trials (RCT), only 6 RCTs directly compared lower versus higher blood pressure targets; remaining RCTs aimed at comparative effectiveness of hypotensive drugs. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP), direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive target SBP <120-140 mmHg decreases the risk of diabetes-related mortality [relative risk (RR) =0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.92], fatal (RR =0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.84) or nonfatal stroke (RR =0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83), prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, macroalbuminuria, and non-spine bone fractures, with no differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or falls. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mmHg, direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive DBP target ≤80 versus 80-90 mmHg decreases the risk of major cardiovascular events. Published meta-analyses of aggregate data suggested a significant association between lower baseline and attained blood pressure and increased cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that in adults with diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension, in order to reduce the risk of stroke, clinicians should target blood pressure at 120-130/80 mmHg, with close monitoring for all drug-related harms.
Authors: J Tuomilehto; D Rastenyte; W H Birkenhäger; L Thijs; R Antikainen; C J Bulpitt; A E Fletcher; F Forette; A Goldhaber; P Palatini; C Sarti; R Fagard Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: L Hansson; T Hedner; P Lund-Johansen; S E Kjeldsen; L H Lindholm; J O Syvertsen; J Lanke; U de Faire; B Dahlöf; B E Karlberg Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-07-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: L H Lindholm; L Hansson; T Ekbom; B Dahlöf; J Lanke; E Linjer; B Scherstén; P O Wester; T Hedner; U de Faire Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Thais de Cássia Negrini; Iracilda Zeppone Carlos; Cristiane Duque; Karina Sampaio Caiaffa; Rodrigo Alex Arthur Journal: Front Oral Health Date: 2021-09-09