Qirui Song1, Qianhui Ling1, Jingjing Bai1, Hongwei Zhang2, Peili Bu3, Fang Chen4, Shouling Wu5, Weili Zhang1, Mulei Chen6, Jun Cai7. 1. Hypertension Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease of China, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beilishi Rd. 167, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100037, China. 2. The Hospital of Shunyi District Beijing, Beijing, 101300, China. 3. Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, Shandong, China. 4. The First People's Hospital of Yinchuan, Yinchuan, 750000, Ningxia, China. 5. Kailuan General Hospital, Tangshan, 063000, Hebei, China. 6. Heart Center and Beijing Key Laboratory of Hypertension, Department of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongtinanlu Rd. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China. chen_1758@126.com. 7. Hypertension Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease of China, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beilishi Rd. 167, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100037, China. caijun7879@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment in older patients with arterial stiffness (AS) remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the interaction between the baseline AS and SBP treatments on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial, we involved 6865 participants with complete data regarding baseline brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV). Patients were categorized by baseline AS status (AS, baPWV ≥ 1800 cm/s; non-AS, baPWV < 1800 cm/s). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular events. The secondary outcomes were stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), major cardiovascular events (MACE), and all-cause death. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for the outcomes. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 2.69 years, a total of 248 primary outcome events and 81 all-cause deaths occurred. The hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54-1.09) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.43-0.92) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.43), and that for stroke was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.33-1.02) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.23-0.99) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.68). Effects of intensive SBP treatment on safety outcomes and all-cause death were also similar in the two groups (P for interaction > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In the STEP trial, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those in the AS group and the non-AS group at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: STEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03015311. Registered 2 January 2017.
BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment in older patients with arterial stiffness (AS) remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the interaction between the baseline AS and SBP treatments on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial, we involved 6865 participants with complete data regarding baseline brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV). Patients were categorized by baseline AS status (AS, baPWV ≥ 1800 cm/s; non-AS, baPWV < 1800 cm/s). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular events. The secondary outcomes were stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), major cardiovascular events (MACE), and all-cause death. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for the outcomes. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 2.69 years, a total of 248 primary outcome events and 81 all-cause deaths occurred. The hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54-1.09) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.43-0.92) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.43), and that for stroke was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.33-1.02) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.23-0.99) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.68). Effects of intensive SBP treatment on safety outcomes and all-cause death were also similar in the two groups (P for interaction > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In the STEP trial, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those in the AS group and the non-AS group at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: STEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03015311. Registered 2 January 2017.
Authors: S Laurent; P Boutouyrie; R Asmar; I Gautier; B Laloux; L Guize; P Ducimetiere; A Benetos Journal: Hypertension Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Carmel M McEniery; Ian R Hall; Ahmad Qasem; Ian B Wilkinson; John R Cockcroft Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-10-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stephane Laurent; Pierre Boutouyrie; Pedro Guimarães Cunha; Patrick Lacolley; Peter M Nilsson Journal: Hypertension Date: 2019-06-17 Impact factor: 10.190
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
Authors: Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 29.690