scholarly journals Effects of Multivitamin and Multimineral Supplementation on Blood Pressure: A Meta-Analysis of 12 Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 1018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelei Li ◽  
Chunxiao Liu ◽  
Xiaotong Kuang ◽  
Qingxue Deng ◽  
Feng Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Lowering Effect ◽  
Normotensive Subjects

Previous studies have not drawn a consistent conclusion about effect of multivitamin and multimineral supplementation (MVMS) on blood pressure. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library (up to May 2018) and references of relevant articles was undertaken. The present meta-analysis included 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), of which eight RCTs in 2011 subjects evaluated the effect of MVMS on blood pressure and four RCTs in 21,196 subjects evaluated the effect of MVMS on the risk of hypertension. MVMS had a lowering effect on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP): the weighted mean difference (WMD) was −1.31 mmHg (95% CI, −2.48 to −0.14 mmHg) and −0.71 mmHg (95% CI, −1.43 to 0.00 mmHg), respectively. Subgroup analysis indicated that the lowering effect of MVMS on blood pressure was only significant in 134 subjects with chronic disease but not in 1580 healthy subjects, and the WMD for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and DBP in subjects with chronic disease was −6.29 mmHg (95% CI, −11.09 to −1.50 mmHg) and −2.32 mmHg (95% CI, −4.50 to −0.13 mmHg), respectively. The effect size of MVMS on SBP in 58 hypertensive subjects (WMD, −7.98 mmHg; 95% CI, −14.95 to −1.02 mmHg) was more than six times of that in 1656 normotensive subjects (WMD, −1.25 mmHg; 95% CI, −2.48 to −0.02 mmHg). However, no significant effect on DBP was observed in both hypertensive and normotensive subgroups. There was no significant effect of MVMS on risk of hypertension in 22,852 subjects with a normal blood pressure at baseline. In conclusion, although MVMS had a significant lowering effect on blood pressure in normotensive subjects, the lowering effect was too small to effectively prevent future hypertension. MVMS may be an effective method for blood pressure control in subjects with chronic disease including hypertension, but the sample size of subjects with hypertension or other chronic disease was too small, and more well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm this result.

scholarly journals Effects of Telemedicine and mHealth on Systolic Blood Pressure Management in Stroke Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

10.2196/24116 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e24116
Author(s):  
Meina Lv ◽  
Tingting Wu ◽  
Shaojun Jiang ◽  
Wenjun Chen ◽  
Jinhua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Stroke Survivors ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background Stroke is a common, harmful disease with high recurrence and mortality rates. Uncontrolled blood pressure is an important and changeable risk factor for stroke recurrence. Telemedicine and mobile health (mHealth) interventions may have the potential to facilitate the control of blood pressure among stroke survivors, but their effect has not been established. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to estimate the effects of telemedicine and mHealth interventions on the control of systolic blood pressure among stroke survivors. Methods The research literature published up to June 28, 2020, and consisting of RCTs related to telemedicine and mHealth interventions was searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. The Cochran Q test and I2 statistic were used to assess heterogeneity. Data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. Mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and 95% prediction interval (PI) were calculated. Results In total, 9 RCTs with a total sample size of 1583 stroke survivors met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the usual care, telemedicine and mHealth had a significantly greater impact on the control of systolic blood pressure (MD –5.49; 95% CI –7.87 to –3.10; P<.001; 95% PI –10.46 to –0.51). A subgroup analysis showed that the intervention mode of telephone plus SMS text messaging (MD –9.09; 95% CI –12.71 to –5.46; P<.001) or only telephone (MD –4.34; 95% CI –6.55 to –2.13; P<.001; 95% PI –7.24 to –1.45) had a greater impact on the control of systolic blood pressure than usual care. Among the stroke survivors with an intervention interval ≤1 week (MD –6.51; 95% CI –9.36 to –3.66; P<.001; 95% PI –12.91 to –0.10) or a baseline systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg (MD –6.15; 95% CI –9.44 to –2.86; P<.001; 95% PI –13.55 to 1.26), the control of systolic blood pressure using telemedicine and mHealth was better than that of usual care. Conclusions In general, telemedicine and mHealth reduced the systolic blood pressure of stroke survivors by an average of 5.49 mm Hg compared with usual care. Telemedicine and mHealth are a relatively new intervention mode with potential applications for the control of systolic blood pressure among stroke survivors, especially those with hypertensive stroke.

Effects of Telemedicine and mHealth on Systolic Blood Pressure Management in Stroke Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meina Lv ◽  
Tingting Wu ◽  
Shaojun Jiang ◽  
Wenjun Chen ◽  
Jinhua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Stroke Survivors ◽  
Randomized Controlled

BACKGROUND Stroke is a common, harmful disease with high recurrence and mortality rates. Uncontrolled blood pressure is an important and changeable risk factor for stroke recurrence. Telemedicine and mobile health (mHealth) interventions may have the potential to facilitate the control of blood pressure among stroke survivors, but their effect has not been established. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to estimate the effects of telemedicine and mHealth interventions on the control of systolic blood pressure among stroke survivors. METHODS The research literature published up to June 28, 2020, and consisting of RCTs related to telemedicine and mHealth interventions was searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. The Cochran <i>Q</i> test and <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic were used to assess heterogeneity. Data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. Mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and 95% prediction interval (PI) were calculated. RESULTS In total, 9 RCTs with a total sample size of 1583 stroke survivors met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the usual care, telemedicine and mHealth had a significantly greater impact on the control of systolic blood pressure (MD –5.49; 95% CI –7.87 to –3.10; <i>P</i>&lt;.001; 95% PI –10.46 to –0.51). A subgroup analysis showed that the intervention mode of telephone plus SMS text messaging (MD –9.09; 95% CI –12.71 to –5.46; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) or only telephone (MD –4.34; 95% CI –6.55 to –2.13; <i>P</i>&lt;.001; 95% PI –7.24 to –1.45) had a greater impact on the control of systolic blood pressure than usual care. Among the stroke survivors with an intervention interval ≤1 week (MD –6.51; 95% CI –9.36 to –3.66; <i>P</i>&lt;.001; 95% PI –12.91 to –0.10) or a baseline systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg (MD –6.15; 95% CI –9.44 to –2.86; <i>P</i>&lt;.001; 95% PI –13.55 to 1.26), the control of systolic blood pressure using telemedicine and mHealth was better than that of usual care. CONCLUSIONS In general, telemedicine and mHealth reduced the systolic blood pressure of stroke survivors by an average of 5.49 mm Hg compared with usual care. Telemedicine and mHealth are a relatively new intervention mode with potential applications for the control of systolic blood pressure among stroke survivors, especially those with hypertensive stroke. CLINICALTRIAL

scholarly journals The Antihypertensive Effects and Safety of LCZ696 in Patients with Hypertension: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (13) ◽  
pp. 2824
Author(s):  
Su-Kiat Chua ◽  
Wei-Ting Lai ◽  
Lung-Ching Chen ◽  
Huei-Fong Hung
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Mean

Background: The management of hypertension remains suboptimal throughout the world. Methods: We performed a random-effects model meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) for the treatment of high arterial pressure. Relevant published articles from PubMed, Cochrane base, and Medline were examined, and the last search date was December 2020. Only published randomized controlled trials and double-blind studies were selected for further analysis. The mean reductions in systolic blood pressure (msSBP) and diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) in the sitting position, as well as the mean reductions in ambulatory systolic blood pressure (maSBP) and ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (maDBP), were assumed as efficacy endpoints. Adverse events (AEs) were considered as safety outcomes. Results: Ten studies with a total of 5931patients were included for analysis. Compared with placebo, LCZ696 had a significant reduction in msSBP (weight mean difference (WMD) = −6.52 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI): −8.57 to −4.47; p < 0.001), msDBP (WMD = −3.32 mmHg, 95% CI: −4.57 to −2.07; p < 0.001), maSBP (WMD = −7.08 mmHg, 95% CI: −10.48 to −3.68; p < 0.001), maDBP (WMD = −3.28 mmHg, 95% CI: −4.55 to −2.02, p < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, only 200 mg and 400 mg LCZ696 showed a significant BP reduction. There was no difference in the AE rate between the LCZ696 and placebo groups (WMD = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.27, p = 0.54). Egger’s test revealed a potential publication bias for msSBP (p = 0.025), but no publication bias for other outcomes. Conclusion: LCZ696 may reduce blood pressure more efficaciously than traditional therapy in hypertensive patients without increasing adverse effects.

scholarly journals Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors on Arterial Stiffness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiuli Li ◽  
Peng Chang ◽  
Qiongying Wang ◽  
Hao Hu ◽  
Feng Bai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Arterial Stiffness ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Antihypertensive Drugs ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
And Control

To determine the effects of ACEIs on arterial stiffness, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted. Relevant articles that investigated the effects of ACEIs on arterial stiffness from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library from inception to September 2018 were systematically retrieved. The investigated outcomes included brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (ba-PWV) and carotid-femoral PWV (cf-PWV) by using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with the random-effects model. A total of 17 RCTs including 1,458 individuals were included. The summary results indicated no significant differences between ACEIs and control for ba-PWV and cf-PWV. Also, no significant differences between ACEI and control for ba-PWV and cf-PWV were observed in hypertensive patients, while the therapeutic effects of ACEI versus placebo showed statistically significant difference. Moreover, subgroup analysis indicated that the levels of ba-PWV were significantly associated if the study was conducted in Western countries, mean age <60.0 years, percentage male ≥60.0%, compared with ARBs, baseline PWV <10.0, and high-quality study. Furthermore, the significant levels of cf-PWV in patients who received ACEIs were observed when percentage male was ≥60.0% and the studies were of high-quality. Finally, no significant differences were observed between ACEIs and other antihypertensive drugs regarding the changes of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). The overall analysis suggested no significant differences between ACEIs and other antihypertensive drugs for ba-PWV and cf-PWV levels, whereas ACEIs versus placebo showed lower levels of ba-PWV and cf-PWV.

scholarly journals The effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Patoulias ◽  
A Boulmpou ◽  
C E Papadopoulos ◽  
F Siskos ◽  
K Stavropoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Ambulatory Blood Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Glucagon Like Peptide ◽  
Glucagon Like Peptide 1

Abstract Background Hypertension augments overall cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), constituting a major additional burden for diabetic subjects; however, control rates of hypertension remain suboptimal. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), second-line treatment option for diabetics, have revolutionized the field of T2DM therapeutic management due to their pleiotropic effects, while they seem to hold multiple cardiovascular benefits. A few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the effect of GLP-1RAs on ambulatory blood pressure (ABP). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) provides a better method to predict long-term cardiovascular outcomes than office blood pressure. Purpose We sought to determine the effect of GLP-1RAs on ABPM, pooling data from relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods We searched 2 major electronic databases, namely PubMed and Cochrane/CENTRAL, along with grey literature sources, for RCTs assessing the effect of various GLP-1RAs on ABP in patients with T2DM. Results After screening of the potentially eligible records, 7 RCTs were finally included in our meta-analysis (4 parallel-group and 3 cross-over). GLP-1RA treatment compared to placebo or active control resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in 24-h systolic blood pressure (MD=−1.57 mm Hg, 95% CI: −4.12 to 0.98, I2=63%) (Figure 1) and in 24-h diastolic blood pressure (MD=1.28 mmHg, 95% CI: −0.31 to 2.87, I2=49%) (Figure 2). No subgroup differences between the various GLP-1RAs were identified. More specifically, it was demonstrated that liraglutide once daily produced a non-significant decrease in 24-h systolic blood pressure (MD=−1.43 mm Hg, 95% CI: −5.24 to 2.38, I2=72%) and a non-significant increase in 24-h diastolic blood pressure (MD=1.47 mm Hg, 95% CI: −1.12 to 4.05, I2=61%), while data concerning the effect of once weekly dulaglutide and twice daily exenatide on ABPM were pooled from one RCT respectively (Figures 1, 2). Conclusions Antidiabetic treatment with GLP-1RAs does not influence either systolic or diastolic ABP in patients with T2DM. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1 Figure 2

Abstract 17683: LCZ696 vs. ACEI/ARB for Hypertension: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdulah Alrifai ◽  
shadi Al Halabi ◽  
Robert Chait
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Essential Hypertension ◽  
Angiotensin Ii ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Introduction: LCZ696 is a first-in-class inhibitor of the angiotensin II receptor and Neprilysin. The use of LCZ696 in Heart Failure is promising compared to ACEI or ARB. The use of LCZ696 for blood pressure has been studied but controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LCZ696 to ACEI/ARB for lowering systolic blood pressure effect. Objectives: To assess the efficacy of LCZ696 on systolic blood pressure in comparison to angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/Angiotensin II receptor antagonist (ARB). Methods: We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane for prospective RCTs that compared LCZ696 versus ACEI or ARB in patients with established diagnosis of essential hypertension. Trials that included patients with essential hypertension with or without heart failure were randomized to either LCZ696 or ACEI or ARB, and that also reported at least one of the studied outcomes were included. Study quality was assessed using the Jadad score. Heterogeneity of the studies was analyzed by Cochran’s Q statistics. Mean differences were calculated using the random effect model. Results: Three RCTs met our inclusion criteria and included 8996 patients who had mild-moderate essential hypertension and were between18-75 years. They were randomized to LCZ696 versus ACEI or ARB. The use of LCZ696 was associated with improved systolic blood pressure control when compared to the control group (MD -3.89; 95% CI -7.75, -0.04; P=0.05). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the use of LCZ696 in hypertensive patients provides better reduction of blood pressure when compared to an ACEI or an ARB.

Exercise and Resting Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis

2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
George A. Kelley ◽  
Kristi S. Kelley
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Resting Blood Pressure ◽  
Initial Blood Pressure

The purpose of this study was to use the meta-analytic approach to examine the effects of exercise on resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure in children and adolescents. Twenty-five studies that included 84 groups (45 exercise, 39 control) and 3,189 subjects (1,885 exercise, 1,304 control) met the criteria for inclusion. Using a random effects model, non-significant decreases of approximately 2% were found for resting systolic (mean – SEM, –2 – 1 mmHg, 95% CI, –4 to 1 mmHg) and diastolic (mean – SEM, –1 – 1 mmHg, 95% CI, –3 to 1 mmHg) blood pressure. Greater decreases in resting systolic blood pressure were found for nonrandomized versus randomized controlled trials (p = 0.001). There was also a statistically significant association between changes in resting systolic blood pressure and initial blood pressure (r = 0.73, p < 0.001) and body weight (r = 0.64, p < 0.001). However, when limited to randomized trials, these results were no longer statistically significant. The results of this study suggest that exercise does not reduce resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure in children and adolescents. However, a need exists for additional randomized controlled trials, especially among hypertensive children and adolescents.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of nebivolol in hypertensive patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 030006052093162
Author(s):  
Jun-Ying Liu ◽  
Li-Na Guo ◽  
Wan-Zhong Peng ◽  
Yang Jiang ◽  
Ai-Li Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Hypertensive Patients ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Β Blockers

Purpose Our meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nebivolol compared with other second-generation β blockers for hypertensive patients. Methods We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The efficacy endpoints included systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), reduction of SBP and DBP, heart rate (HR), and adverse events (AEs). Findings Eight RCTs with 1514 patients met the inclusion criteria. HR was significantly lower in patients receiving other second-generation β blockers compared with patients receiving nebivolol. There was no difference the reduction of blood pressure (SBP and DBP) or the reduction of SBP or DBP between the groups. The incidence of AEs was lower in patients taking nebivolol compared with patients taking other second-generation β blockers. Conclusions No significant difference was demonstrated between nebivolol and other second-generation β blockers in the reduction of blood pressure, SBP, and DBP. The tolerability of nebivolol was significantly better compared with other second-generation β blockers, and nebivolol was also associated with a stable HR and a lower risk of AEs compared with other second-generation β blockers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document