scholarly journals Role of Blood Pressure Management in Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of 93 Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Xiao-Ling Zhong ◽  
Yi Dong ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
Yu-Yuan Huang ◽  
Hui-Fu Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antihypertensive Agents ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Converting Enzyme Inhibitors ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Pairwise Analysis

Background and Purpose The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of different blood pressure (BP)-lowering strategies.Methods Randomized controlled trials that compared various antihypertensive treatments and stroke outcomes were included. Eligible trials were categorized into three scenarios: single or combination antihypertensive agents against placebos; single or combination agents against other agents; and different BP-lowering targets. The primary efficacy outcome was the risk reduction pertaining to strokes. The tolerability outcome was the withdrawal of drugs, owing to drug-related side effects (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018118454 [20/12/2018]).Results The present study included 93 trials (average follow-up duration, 3.3 years). In the pairwise analysis, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and beta-blockers (BBs) were inferior to calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (odds ratio [OR], 1.123; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.008 to 1.252) (OR, 1.261; 95% CI, 1.116 to 1.425) for stroke prevention, BB was inferior to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) (OR, 1.361; 95% CI, 1.142 to 1.622), and diuretics were superior to ACEi (OR, 0.871; 95% CI, 0.771 to 0.984). The combination of ACEi+CCB was superior to ACEi+diuretic (OR, 0.892; 95% CI, 0.823 to 0.966). The network meta-analysis confirmed that diuretics were superior to BB (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.58), ACEi+diuretic (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.08), BB+CCB (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.05 to 3.79), and renin inhibitors (OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.75) for stroke prevention. Regarding the tolerability profile, the pairwise analysis revealed that ACEi was inferior to CCB and less tolerable, compared to the other treatments.Conclusions Monotherapy using diuretics, CCB, or ARB, and their combinations could be employed as first-line treatments for stroke prevention in terms of efficacy and tolerability.

Effectiveness of interventions involving nurses in secondary stroke prevention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 728-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beena P Parappilly ◽  
Thalia S Field ◽  
William B Mortenson ◽  
Brodie M Sakakibara ◽  
Janice J Eng
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background and purpose: Among members of the health care team, nurses play a large role in actively engaging stroke survivors in secondary stroke prevention programs. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effectiveness of interventions in which nurses have a primary role on modification of risk factors among stroke survivors. Methods: We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials in relevant databases investigating the role of nurses in secondary stroke prevention. Meta-analyses were conducted using Cochrane Review Manager Software. The mean pooled effect size, a 95% confidence interval (CI), and I-squared ( I2) for heterogeneity were calculated. Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 3568 stroke and transient ischemic attack patients. After removing one outlier, the models demonstrated a statistically significant effect on reducing systolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.14 (95% CI = −0.23, –0.05), I2 = 0%; p = 0.002, six studies, n =1885) and diastolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.16 (95% CI = −0.27, –0.05), I2 = 0%; p = 0.003, four studies, n =1316). The interventions also significantly improved physical activity (five studies, n=1234), diet (three studies, n=425), medication adherence (two studies, n=270), and knowledge of risk factors (three studies, n=516). However, there was no effect on smoking cessation or reduction in use of alcohol. Conclusion: We found that interventions in which nurses had a primary role were effective on improving medical and behavioral risk factors, as well as knowledge of risk factors as part of secondary prevention of stroke.

scholarly journals Effect of grape products on blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 627-645
Author(s):  
Omid Asbaghi ◽  
Fatemeh Naeini ◽  
Vihan Moodi ◽  
Moein Najafi ◽  
Mina Shirinbakhshmasoleh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Evening anti-hypertensive dosing improves blood pressure control and reduce cardiovascular events in hypertensive: a meta-analysis of 40 trials in 44,167 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A.P Sunjaya ◽  
A.F Sunjaya
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Blood Pressure Control ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pressure Control ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Night Time ◽  
Randomized Controlled

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

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document