2.1 THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF CENTRAL AND BRACHIAL BLOOD PRESSURE IN PREDICTING CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS: AN INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANT META-ANALYSIS OF PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL DATA FROM 22,433 SUBJECTS

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (C) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Carmel McEniery ◽  
Yoav Ben-Shlomo ◽  
Margaret May ◽  
Melissa Spears ◽  
Lyndia Brumback ◽  
...  
PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. e1003599
Author(s):  
Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes ◽  
Luis Azevedo ◽  
Emma Copland ◽  
Dexter Canoy ◽  
Milad Nazarzadeh ◽  
...  

Background Randomised evidence on the efficacy of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of BP-lowering drugs in patients with and without AF at baseline. Methods and findings The study was based on the resource provided by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration (BPLTTC), in which individual participant data (IPD) were extracted from trials with over 1,000 patient-years of follow-up in each arm, and that had randomly assigned patients to different classes of BP-lowering drugs, BP-lowering drugs versus placebo, or more versus less intensive BP-lowering regimens. For this study, only trials that had collected information on AF status at baseline were included. The effects of BP-lowering treatment on a composite endpoint of major cardiovascular events (stroke, ischaemic heart disease or heart failure) according to AF status at baseline were estimated using fixed-effect one-stage IPD meta-analyses based on Cox proportional hazards models stratified by trial. Furthermore, to assess whether the associations between the intensity of BP reduction and cardiovascular outcomes are similar in those with and without AF at baseline, we used a meta-regression. From the full BPLTTC database, 28 trials (145,653 participants) were excluded because AF status at baseline was uncertain or unavailable. A total of 22 trials were included with 188,570 patients, of whom 13,266 (7%) had AF at baseline. Risk of bias assessment showed that 20 trials were at low risk of bias and 2 trials at moderate risk. Meta-regression showed that relative risk reductions were proportional to trial-level intensity of BP lowering in patients with and without AF at baseline. Over 4.5 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg systolic BP (SBP) reduction lowered the risk of major cardiovascular events both in patients with AF (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83 to 1.00) and in patients without AF at baseline (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93), with no difference between subgroups. There was no evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline SBP or drug class in patients with AF at baseline. The findings of this study need to be interpreted in light of its potential limitations, such as the limited number of trials, limitation in ascertaining AF cases due to the nature of the arrhythmia and measuring BP in patients with AF. Conclusions In this meta-analysis, we found that BP-lowering treatment reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events similarly in individuals with and without AF. Pharmacological BP lowering for prevention of cardiovascular events should be recommended in patients with AF.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A.P Sunjaya ◽  
A.F Sunjaya

Abstract Introduction Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) and early morning BP surge have consistently been found to be a better prognostic marker of cardiovascular outcome than daytime BP. Most anti-hypertensive show greater blood pressure-lowering effect in the first 12 hours compared to the next 12 hours. Several prospective studies have shown better BP regulation and improved cardiovascular risk when anti-hypertensive are ingested at bedtime versus at awakening. Purpose In patients with hypertension does evening dosing of anti-hypertensive compared to morning dosing led to better reduction in pressure, blood pressure control and reduced cardiovascular morbidity. Methods A meta-analysis was performed based on randomized controlled trials obtained from Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Medline and Medline ahead of print published between 2000 and 2020. Main outcome measures include mean 24 hour systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cardiovascular events as well as prevalence of blood pressure in control. Data synthesis and analysis was done using RevMan 5.3 using a random effects model. Results A total of 40 randomized controlled trials, representing 44,167 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Most studies evaluate the administration of mixed anti-hypertensive with ≥1 medication ingested at bedtime, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) with sample sizes ranging from 30 to 19,084 patients. Evening administration of anti-hypertensive was found to significantly lower 24-hour systolic blood pressure (Mean difference = −1.05, 95% CI: −2.01 to −0.10, p=0.03) and 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (Mean difference = −1.09, 95% CI: −1.68 to −0.50, p=0.0003). Prevalence of controlled blood pressure was found to significantly increase with evening dosing (RR=1.15, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.28, p=0.01). Significant reduction in cardiovascular events were found in the evening dosing group (RR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.68, p=<0.00001). Discussion Reduction in night-time blood pressure especially among non-dippers as reported in previous studies and higher prevalence of controlled blood pressure may explain the greater than 50% reduction in cardiovascular events in the evening dosing group. This marked benefit from a simple and inexpensive strategy certainly has great potential to benefit patients in practice. Even so, few studies have reported the prevalence of blood pressure in control (9 studies) and cardiovascular events (6 studies). Few has also studied this in geriatric populations where night-time hypotension and hypoperfusion may bring the most impact. Conclusion For patients with hypertension, evening dosing significantly improves blood pressure control and reduces the risk for cardiovascular events. Careful selection of anti-hypertensive administration time in patients is recommended given the possible benefits. Anti Hypertensive Dosing Forest Plot Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e040481
Author(s):  
Sinead T J McDonagh ◽  
James P Sheppard ◽  
Fiona C Warren ◽  
Kate Boddy ◽  
Leon Farmer ◽  
...  

IntroductionBlood pressure (BP) is normally measured on the upper arm, and guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of high BP are based on such measurements. Leg BP measurement can be an alternative when brachial BP measurement is impractical, due to injury or disability. Limited data exist to guide interpretation of leg BP values for hypertension management; study-level systematic review findings suggest that systolic BP (SBP) is 17 mm Hg higher in the leg than the arm. However, uncertainty remains about the applicability of this figure in clinical practice due to substantial heterogeneity.AimsTo examine the relationship between arm and leg SBP, develop and validate a multivariable model predicting arm SBP from leg SBP and investigate the prognostic association between leg SBP and cardiovascular disease and mortality.Methods and analysisIndividual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses using arm and leg SBP measurements for 33 710 individuals from 14 studies within the Inter-arm blood pressure difference IPD (INTERPRESS-IPD) Collaboration. We will explore cross-sectional relationships between arm and leg SBP using hierarchical linear regression with participants nested by study, in multivariable models. Prognostic models will be derived for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular events.Ethics and disseminationData originate from studies with prior ethical approval and consent, and data sharing agreements are in place—no further approvals are required to undertake the secondary analyses proposed in this protocol. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journal articles and presented at conferences. A comprehensive dissemination strategy is in place, integrated with patient and public involvement.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015031227.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document