Literature DB >> 32905623

Blood pressure targets for the treatment of people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease.

Luis Carlos Saiz1, Javier Gorricho2, Javier Garjón3, Mª Concepción Celaya4, Juan Erviti1, Leire Leache1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This is the second update of the review first published in 2017. Hypertension is a prominent preventable cause of premature morbidity and mortality. People with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease are at particularly high risk, so reducing blood pressure to below standard targets may be beneficial. This strategy could reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity but could also increase adverse events. The optimal blood pressure target in people with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease remains unknown.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if lower blood pressure targets (135/85 mmHg or less) are associated with reduction in mortality and morbidity as compared with standard blood pressure targets (140 to 160/90 to 100 mmHg or less) in the treatment of people with hypertension and a history of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, angina, stroke, peripheral vascular occlusive disease). SEARCH
METHODS: For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to November 2019: Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (from 1982), along with the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. We applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs with more than 50 participants per group that provided at least six months' follow-up. Trial reports had to present data for at least one primary outcome (total mortality, serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality). Eligible interventions involved lower targets for systolic/diastolic blood pressure (135/85 mmHg or less) compared with standard targets for blood pressure (140 to 160/90 to 100 mmHg or less). Participants were adults with documented hypertension and adults receiving treatment for hypertension with a cardiovascular history for myocardial infarction, stroke, chronic peripheral vascular occlusive disease, or angina pectoris. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed search results and extracted data using standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN
RESULTS: We included six RCTs that involved 9484 participants. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (range 1.0 to 4.7 years). All RCTs provided individual participant data. None of the included studies was blinded to participants or clinicians because of the need to titrate antihypertensives to reach a specific blood pressure goal. However, an independent committee blinded to group allocation assessed clinical events in all trials. Hence, we assessed all trials at high risk of performance bias and low risk of detection bias. Other issues such as early termination of studies and subgroups of participants not predefined were also considered to downgrade the quality evidence. We found there is probably little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.23; 6 studies, 9484 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.29; 6 studies, 9484 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Similarly, we found there may be little to no differences in serious adverse events (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.08; 6 studies, 9484 participants; low-quality evidence) or total cardiovascular events (including myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden death, hospitalization, or death from congestive heart failure) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 6 studies, 9484 participants; low-quality evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about withdrawals due to adverse effects. However, studies suggest more participants may withdraw due to adverse effects in the lower target group (RR 8.16, 95% CI 2.06 to 32.28; 2 studies, 690 participants; very low-quality evidence). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings were lower in the lower target group (systolic: mean difference (MD) -8.90 mmHg, 95% CI -13.24 to -4.56; 6 studies, 8546 participants; diastolic: MD -4.50 mmHg, 95% CI -6.35 to -2.65; 6 studies, 8546 participants). More drugs were needed in the lower target group (MD 0.56, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.96; 5 studies, 7910 participants), but blood pressure targets were achieved more frequently in the standard target group (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.24; 6 studies, 8588 participants). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: We found there is probably little to no difference in total mortality and cardiovascular mortality between people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease treated to a lower compared to a standard blood pressure target. There may also be little to no difference in serious adverse events or total cardiovascular events. This suggests that no net health benefit is derived from a lower systolic blood pressure target. We found very limited evidence on withdrawals due to adverse effects, which led to high uncertainty. At present, evidence is insufficient to justify lower blood pressure targets (135/85 mmHg or less) in people with hypertension and established cardiovascular disease. Several trials are still ongoing, which may provide an important input to this topic in the near future.
Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32905623      PMCID: PMC8094921          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010315.pub4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  87 in total

1.  Treatment of hypertension in the prevention and management of ischemic heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council for High Blood Pressure Research and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Epidemiology and Prevention.

Authors:  Clive Rosendorff; Henry R Black; Christopher P Cannon; Bernard J Gersh; Joel Gore; Joseph L Izzo; Norman M Kaplan; Christopher M O'Connor; Patrick T O'Gara; Suzanne Oparil
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-05-14       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Aggressive blood pressure lowering is dangerous: the J-curve: con side of the arguement.

Authors:  Paolo Verdecchia; Fabio Angeli; Giovanni Mazzotta; Marta Garofoli; Gianpaolo Reboldi
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 10.190

3.  Effects of individual risk factors on the incidence of cardiovascular events in the treated hypertensive patients of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment Study. HOT Study Group.

Authors:  A Zanchetti; L Hansson; B Dahlöf; D Elmfeldt; S Kjeldsen; R Kolloch; P Larochelle; G T McInnes; J M Mallion; L Ruilope; H Wedel
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.844

4.  Blood-pressure control for renoprotection in patients with non-diabetic chronic renal disease (REIN-2): multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Piero Ruggenenti; Annalisa Perna; Giacomina Loriga; Maria Ganeva; Bogdan Ene-Iordache; Marta Turturro; Maria Lesti; Elena Perticucci; Ivan Nediyalkov Chakarski; Daniela Leonardis; Giovanni Garini; Adalberto Sessa; Carlo Basile; Mirella Alpa; Renzo Scanziani; Gianbattista Sorba; Carmine Zoccali; Giuseppe Remuzzi
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Mar 12-18       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Dogma disputed: can aggressively lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease be dangerous?

Authors:  Franz H Messerli; Giuseppe Mancia; C Richard Conti; Ann C Hewkin; Stuart Kupfer; Annette Champion; Rainer Kolloch; Athanase Benetos; Carl J Pepine
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-06-20       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document.

Authors:  Giuseppe Mancia; Stéphane Laurent; Enrico Agabiti-Rosei; Ettore Ambrosioni; Michel Burnier; Mark J Caulfield; Renata Cifkova; Denis Clément; Antonio Coca; Anna Dominiczak; Serap Erdine; Robert Fagard; Csaba Farsang; Guido Grassi; Hermann Haller; Antony Heagerty; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Wolfgang Kiowski; Jean Michel Mallion; Athanasios Manolis; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Peter Nilsson; Michael H Olsen; Karl Heinz Rahn; Josep Redon; José Rodicio; Luis Ruilope; Roland E Schmieder; Harry A J Struijker-Boudier; Pieter A Van Zwieten; Margus Viigimaa; Alberto Zanchetti
Journal:  Blood Press       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.835

7.  Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes in Adults Aged ≥75 Years: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Jeff D Williamson; Mark A Supiano; William B Applegate; Dan R Berlowitz; Ruth C Campbell; Glenn M Chertow; Larry J Fine; William E Haley; Amret T Hawfield; Joachim H Ix; Dalane W Kitzman; John B Kostis; Marie A Krousel-Wood; Lenore J Launer; Suzanne Oparil; Carlos J Rodriguez; Christianne L Roumie; Ronald I Shorr; Kaycee M Sink; Virginia G Wadley; Paul K Whelton; Jeffrey Whittle; Nancy F Woolard; Jackson T Wright; Nicholas M Pajewski
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies.

Authors:  Sarah Lewington; Robert Clarke; Nawab Qizilbash; Richard Peto; Rory Collins
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-12-14       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Effect of Standard vs Intensive Blood Pressure Control on Cerebral Blood Flow in Small Vessel Disease: The PRESERVE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Iain D Croall; Daniel J Tozer; Barry Moynihan; Usman Khan; John T O'Brien; Robin G Morris; Victoria C Cambridge; Thomas R Barrick; Andrew M Blamire; Gary A Ford; Hugh S Markus
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 18.302

10.  Potential impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline on high blood pressure in normotensive patients with stable coronary artery disease: insights from the CLARIFY registry.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Vidal-Petiot; Emmanuel Sorbets; Deepak L Bhatt; Gregory Ducrocq; Yedid Elbez; Roberto Ferrari; Ian Ford; Jean-Claude Tardif; Michal Tendera; Kim M Fox; Philippe Gabriel Steg
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  5 in total

1.  Variation in hypertension clinical practice guidelines: a global comparison.

Authors:  Richu Philip; Thomas Beaney; Nick Appelbaum; Carmen Rodriguez Gonzalvez; Charlotte Koldeweij; Amelia Kataria Golestaneh; Neil Poulter; Jonathan M Clarke
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 8.775

2.  Gender-specific predictive ability for the risk of hypertension incidence related to baseline level or trajectories of adiposity indices: a cohort study of functional community.

Authors:  Ya-Ke Lu; Jing Dong; Yue Sun; Li-Kun Hu; Yu-Hong Liu; Xi Chu; Yu-Xiang Yan
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 5.095

3.  Blood pressure targets in adults with hypertension.

Authors:  Jose Agustin Arguedas; Viriam Leiva; James M Wright
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-12-17

Review 4.  Hypertension Management in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease in the Post-SPRINT Era.

Authors:  Hae Hyuk Jung
Journal:  Electrolyte Blood Press       Date:  2021-12-23

5.  Convergence of infectious and non-communicable disease epidemics in rural South Africa: a cross-sectional, population-based multimorbidity study.

Authors:  Emily B Wong; Stephen Olivier; Resign Gunda; Olivier Koole; Ashmika Surujdeen; Dickman Gareta; Day Munatsi; Tshwaraganang H Modise; Jaco Dreyer; Siyabonga Nxumalo; Theresa K Smit; Greg Ording-Jespersen; Innocentia B Mpofana; Khadija Khan; Zizile E L Sikhosana; Sashen Moodley; Yen-Ju Shen; Thandeka Khoza; Ngcebo Mhlongo; Sanah Bucibo; Kennedy Nyamande; Kathy J Baisley; Diego Cuadros; Frank Tanser; Alison D Grant; Kobus Herbst; Janet Seeley; Willem A Hanekom; Thumbi Ndung'u; Mark J Siedner; Deenan Pillay
Journal:  Lancet Glob Health       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 26.763

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.