Dataset Information

Early lowering of blood pressure after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To summarise evidence of the effects of blood pressure (BP)-lowering interventions after acute spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH).

Methods

A prespecified systematic review of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception to 23 June 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials that compared active BP-lowering agents versus placebo or intensive versus guideline BP-lowering targets for adults <7 days after ICH onset. The primary outcome was function (distribution of scores on the modified Rankin scale) 90 days after randomisation. Radiological outcomes were absolute (>6 mL) and proportional (>33%) haematoma growth at 24 hours. Meta-analysis used a one-stage approach, adjusted using generalised linear mixed models with prespecified covariables and trial as a random effect.

Results

Of 7094 studies identified, 50 trials involving 11 494 patients were eligible and 16 (32.0%) shared patient-level data from 6221 (54.1%) patients (mean age 64.2 [SD 12.9], 2266 [36.4%] females) with a median time from symptom onset to randomisation of 3.8 hours (IQR 2.6-5.3). Active/intensive BP-lowering interventions had no effect on the primary outcome compared with placebo/guideline treatment (adjusted OR for unfavourable shift in modified Rankin scale scores: 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; p=0.50), but there was significant heterogeneity by strategy (p_interaction=0.031) and agent (p_interaction<0.0001). Active/intensive BP-lowering interventions clearly reduced absolute (>6 ml, adjusted OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.60 to 0.92; p=0.0077) and relative (≥33%, adjusted OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.68 to 0.99; p=0.034) haematoma growth.

Interpretation

Overall, a broad range of interventions to lower BP within 7 days of ICH onset had no overall benefit on functional recovery, despite reducing bleeding. The treatment effect appeared to vary according to strategy and agent.

Prospero registration number

CRD42019141136.

SUBMITTER: Moullaali TJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8685661 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntracerebral haemorrhage growth is associated with poor clinical outcome and is a therapeutic target for improving outcome. We aimed to determine the absolute risk and predictors of intracerebral haemorrhage growth, develop and validate prediction models, and evaluate the added value of CT angiography.MethodsIn a systematic review of OVID MEDLINE-with additional hand-searching of relevant studies' bibliographies- from Jan 1, 1970, to Dec 31, 2015, we identified observational cohorts and randomised trials with repeat scanning protocols that included at least ten patients with acute intracerebral haemorrhage. We sought individual patient-level data from corresponding authors for patients aged 18 years or older with data available from brain imaging initially done 0·5-24 h and repeated fewer than 6 days after symptom onset, who had baseline intracerebral haemorrhage volume of less than 150 mL, and did not undergo acute treatment that might reduce intracerebral haemorrhage volume. We estimated the absolute risk and predictors of the primary outcome of intracerebral haemorrhage growth (defined as >6 mL increase in intracerebral haemorrhage volume on repeat imaging) using multivariable logistic regression models in development and validation cohorts in four subgroups of patients, using a hierarchical approach: patients not taking anticoagulant therapy at intracerebral haemorrhage onset (who constituted the largest subgroup), patients taking anticoagulant therapy at intracerebral haemorrhage onset, patients from cohorts that included at least some patients taking anticoagulant therapy at intracerebral haemorrhage onset, and patients for whom both information about anticoagulant therapy at intracerebral haemorrhage onset and spot sign on acute CT angiography were known.FindingsOf 4191 studies identified, 77 were eligible for inclusion. Overall, 36 (47%) cohorts provided data on 5435 eligible patients. 5076 of these patients were not taking anticoagulant therapy at symptom onset (median age 67 years, IQR 56-76), of whom 1009 (20%) had intracerebral haemorrhage growth. Multivariable models of patients with data on antiplatelet therapy use, data on anticoagulant therapy use, and assessment of CT angiography spot sign at symptom onset showed that time from symptom onset to baseline imaging (odds ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·36-0·70; p<0·0001), intracerebral haemorrhage volume on baseline imaging (7·18, 4·46-11·60; p<0·0001), antiplatelet use (1·68, 1·06-2·66; p=0·026), and anticoagulant use (3·48, 1·96-6·16; p<0·0001) were independent predictors of intracerebral haemorrhage growth (C-index 0·78, 95% CI 0·75-0·82). Addition of CT angiography spot sign (odds ratio 4·46, 95% CI 2·95-6·75; p<0·0001) to the model increased the C-index by 0·05 (95% CI 0·03-0·07).InterpretationIn this large patient-level meta-analysis, models using four or five predictors had acceptable to good discrimination. These models could inform the location and frequency of observations on patients in clinical practice, explain treatment effects in prior randomised trials, and guide the design of future trials.FundingUK Medical Research Council and British Heart Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines have traditionally recommended blood pressure treatment based primarily on blood pressure thresholds. In contrast, using predicted cardiovascular risk has been advocated as a more effective strategy to guide treatment decisions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. We aimed to compare outcomes from a blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk with one based on systolic blood pressure (SBP) level.Methods and findingsWe used individual participant data from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC) from 1995 to 2013. Trials randomly assigned participants to either blood pressure-lowering drugs versus placebo or more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering regimens. We estimated 5-y risk of CVD events using a multivariable Weibull model previously developed in this dataset. We compared the two strategies at specific SBP thresholds and across the spectrum of risk and blood pressure levels studied in BPLTTC trials. The primary outcome was number of CVD events avoided per persons treated. We included data from 11 trials (47,872 participants). During a median of 4.0 y of follow-up, 3,566 participants (7.5%) experienced a major cardiovascular event. Areas under the curve comparing the two treatment strategies throughout the range of possible thresholds for CVD risk and SBP demonstrated that, on average, a greater number of CVD events would be avoided for a given number of persons treated with the CVD risk strategy compared with the SBP strategy (area under the curve 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.72] for the CVD risk strategy versus 0.54 [95% CI 0.53-0.55] for the SBP strategy). Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 150 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 29% (95% CI 26%-31%) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 16% (95% CI 14%-18%) more events for the same number of persons treated. Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 140 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 3.8% (95% CI 12.5% fewer to 7.2% more) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 3.1% (95% CI 1.5%-5.0%) more events for the same number of persons treated, although the former estimate was not statistically significant. In subgroup analyses, the CVD risk strategy did not appear to be more beneficial than the SBP strategy in patients with diabetes mellitus or established CVD.ConclusionsA blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk is more effective than one based on blood pressure levels alone across a range of thresholds. These results support using cardiovascular risk assessment to guide blood pressure treatment decision-making in moderate- to high-risk individuals, particularly for primary prevention.

Project description:BackgroundIt is often assumed that blood pressure increases acutely after major stroke, resulting in so-called post-stroke hypertension. In view of evidence that the risks and benefits of blood pressure-lowering treatment in acute stroke might differ between patients with major ischaemic stroke and those with primary intracerebral haemorrhage, we compared acute-phase and premorbid blood pressure levels in these two disorders.MethodsIn a population-based study in Oxfordshire, UK, we recruited all patients presenting with stroke between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2012. We compared all acute-phase post-event blood pressure readings with premorbid readings from 10-year primary care records in all patients with acute major ischaemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale >3) versus those with acute intracerebral haemorrhage.FindingsOf 653 consecutive eligible patients, premorbid and acute-phase blood pressure readings were available for 636 (97%) individuals. Premorbid blood pressure (total readings 13,244) had been measured on a median of 17 separate occasions per patient (IQR 8-31). In patients with ischaemic stroke, the first acute-phase systolic blood pressure was much lower than after intracerebral haemorrhage (158·5 mm Hg [SD 30·1] vs 189·8 mm Hg [38·5], p<0·0001; for patients not on antihypertensive treatment 159·2 mm Hg [27·8] vs 193·4 mm Hg [37·4], p<0·0001), was little higher than premorbid levels (increase of 10·6 mm Hg vs 10-year mean premorbid level), and decreased only slightly during the first 24 h (mean decrease from <90 min to 24 h 13·6 mm Hg). By contrast with findings in ischaemic stroke, the mean first systolic blood pressure after intracerebral haemorrhage was substantially higher than premorbid levels (mean increase of 40·7 mm Hg, p<0·0001) and fell substantially in the first 24 h (mean decrease of 41·1 mm Hg; p=0·0007 for difference from decrease in ischaemic stroke). Mean systolic blood pressure also increased steeply in the days and weeks before intracerebral haemorrhage (regression p<0·0001) but not before ischaemic stroke. Consequently, the first acute-phase blood pressure reading after primary intracerebral haemorrhage was more likely than after ischaemic stroke to be the highest ever recorded (OR 3·4, 95% CI 2·3-5·2, p<0·0001). In patients with intracerebral haemorrhage seen within 90 min, the highest systolic blood pressure within 3 h of onset was 50 mm Hg higher, on average, than the maximum premorbid level whereas that after ischaemic stroke was 5·2 mm Hg lower (p<0·0001).InterpretationOur findings suggest that systolic blood pressure is substantially raised compared with usual premorbid levels after intracerebral haemorrhage, whereas acute-phase systolic blood pressure after major ischaemic stroke is much closer to the accustomed long-term premorbid level, providing a potential explanation for why the risks and benefits of lowering blood pressure acutely after stroke might be expected to differ.FundingWellcome Trust, Wolfson Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, Stroke Association, British Heart Foundation, National Institute for Health Research.