Dataset Information

Achieved systolic blood pressure in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: It remains unclear into which level the systolic blood pressure (SBP) should be lowered in order to provide the best cardiovascular protection among older people. Hypertension guidelines recommendation on attaining SBP levels <150 mmHg in this population is currently based on experts' opinion. To clarify this issue, we systematically reviewed and quantified available evidence on the impact of achieving different SBP levels <150 mmHg on various adverse outcomes in subjects aged ?60 years old receiving antihypertensive drug treatment.We searched 8 databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post-hoc analyses or subanalyses of RCTs reporting the effects of attaining different SBP levels <150 mmHg on the risk of stroke, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality in participants aged ?60 years. We performed random-effects meta-analyses stratified by study design.Eleven studies (> 33,600 participants) were included. Compared with attaining SBP levels ?140 mmHg, levels of 130 to <140 mmHg were not associated with lower risk of outcomes in the meta-analysis of RCTs, whereas there was an associated reduction of cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.99) in the meta-analysis of post-hoc analyses or subanalyses of RCTs. Limited and conflicting data were available for the SBP levels of <130 mmHg and 140 to <150 mmHg.Among older people, there is suggestive evidence that achieving SBP levels of 130 to <140 mmHg is associated with lower risks of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Future trials are required to confirm these findings and to provide additional evidence regarding the <130 and 140 to <150 mmHg SBP levels.

SUBMITTER: Moraes AAI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5717809 | biostudies-other | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Achieved systolic blood pressure in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Moraes Aline A I AAI Baena Cristina P CP Muka Taulant T Bano Arjola A Buitrago-Lopez Adriana A Zazula Ana A Erbano Bruna O BO Schio Nicolle A NA Guedes Murilo H MH Bramer Wichor M WM Franco Oscar H OH Faria-Neto José Rocha JR

BMC geriatrics 20171205 1

<h4>Background</h4>It remains unclear into which level the systolic blood pressure (SBP) should be lowered in order to provide the best cardiovascular protection among older people. Hypertension guidelines recommendation on attaining SBP levels <150 mmHg in this population is currently based on experts' opinion. To clarify this issue, we systematically reviewed and quantified available evidence on the impact of achieving different SBP levels <150 mmHg on various adverse outcomes in subjects aged ...[more]

PMID: 29207946

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceClinical trials have documented that lowering blood pressure reduces cardiovascular disease and premature deaths. However, the optimal target for reduction of systolic blood pressure (SBP) is uncertain.ObjectiveTo assess the association of mean achieved SBP levels with the risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in adults with hypertension treated with antihypertensive therapy.Data sourcesMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to December 15, 2015, supplemented by manual searches of the bibliographies of retrieved articles.Study selectionStudies included were clinical trials with random allocation to an antihypertensive medication, control, or treatment target. Studies had to have reported a difference in mean achieved SBP of 5 mm Hg or more between comparison groups.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted from each study independently and in duplicate by at least 2 investigators according to a standardized protocol. Network meta-analysis was used to obtain pooled randomized results comparing the association of each 5-mm Hg SBP category with clinical outcomes after adjusting for baseline risk.Main outcomes and measuresCardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality.ResultsForty-two trials, including 144 220 patients, met the eligibility criteria. In general, there were linear associations between mean achieved SBP and risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality, with the lowest risk at 120 to 124 mm Hg. Randomized groups with a mean achieved SBP of 120 to 124 mm Hg had a hazard ratio (HR) for major cardiovascular disease of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.60-0.83) compared with randomized groups with a mean achieved SBP of 130 to 134 mm Hg, an HR of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.72) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 140 to 144 mm Hg, an HR of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.34-0.63) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 150 to 154 mm Hg, and an HR of 0.36 (95% CI, 0.26-0.51) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 160 mm Hg or more. Likewise, randomized groups with a mean achieved SBP of 120 to 124 mm Hg had an HR for all-cause mortality of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.93) compared with randomized groups with a mean achieved SBP of 130 to 134 mm Hg, an HR of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.45-0.77) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 140 to 144 mm Hg, an HR of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.36-0.71) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 150 to 154 mm Hg, and an HR of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.32-0.67) compared with those with a mean achieved SBP of 160 mm Hg or more.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that reducing SBP to levels below currently recommended targets significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. These findings support more intensive control of SBP among adults with hypertension.

Project description:Objective To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure, independent of mean blood pressure, with cardiovascular disease events and mortality.Data sources Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science, searched to 15 February 2016 for full text articles in English.Eligibility criteria for study selection Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in adults, except those in patients receiving haemodialysis, where the condition may directly impact blood pressure variability. Standardised hazard ratios were extracted and, if there was little risk of confounding, combined using random effects meta-analysis in main analyses. Outcomes included all cause and cardiovascular disease mortality and cardiovascular disease events. Measures of variability included standard deviation, coefficient of variation, variation independent of mean, and average real variability, but not night dipping or day-night variation.Results 41 papers representing 19 observational cohort studies and 17 clinical trial cohorts, comprising 46 separate analyses were identified. Long term variability in blood pressure was studied in 24 papers, mid-term in four, and short-term in 15 (two studied both long term and short term variability). Results from 23 analyses were excluded from main analyses owing to high risks of confounding. Increased long term variability in systolic blood pressure was associated with risk of all cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.22), cardiovascular disease mortality (1.18, 1.09 to 1.28), cardiovascular disease events (1.18, 1.07 to 1.30), coronary heart disease (1.10, 1.04 to 1.16), and stroke (1.15, 1.04 to 1.27). Increased mid-term and short term variability in daytime systolic blood pressure were also associated with all cause mortality (1.15, 1.06 to 1.26 and 1.10, 1.04 to 1.16, respectively).Conclusions Long term variability in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes, over and above the effect of mean blood pressure. Associations are similar in magnitude to those of cholesterol measures with cardiovascular disease. Limited data for mid-term and short term variability showed similar associations. Future work should focus on the clinical implications of assessment of variability in blood pressure and avoid the common confounding pitfalls observed to date.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014015695.

Project description:BackgroundStroke 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.ObjectiveThis 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsIn 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.ConclusionsIn 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.

Project description:Abstract Aims High blood pressure (BP) is the commonest modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, yet its monitoring remains problematic. Wearable cuffless BP devices offer potential solutions; however, little is known about their validity and utility. We aimed to systematically review the validity, features and clinical use of wearable cuffless BP devices. Methods and results We searched MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore and the Cochrane Database till December 2019 for studies that reported validating cuffless BP devices. We extracted information about study characteristics, device features, validation processes, and clinical applications. Devices were classified according to their functions and features. We defined devices with a mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) biases of <5 mmHg as valid as a consensus. Our definition of validity did not include assessment of device measurement precision, which is assessed by standard deviation of the mean difference—a critical component of ISO protocol validation criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to summarise the mean biases for SBP and DBP across studies. Of the 430 studies identified, 16 studies (15 devices, 974 participants) were selected. The majority of devices (81.3%) used photoplethysmography to estimate BP against a reference device; other technologies included tonometry, auscultation and electrocardiogram. In addition to BP and heart rate, some devices also measured night-time BP (n = 5), sleep monitoring (n = 3), oxygen saturation (n = 3), temperature (n = 2) and electrocardiogram (n = 3). Eight devices showed mean biases of <5 mmHg for SBP and DBP compared with a reference device and three devices were commercially available. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between the wearable and reference devices for SBP (pooled mean difference = 3.42 mmHg, 95% CI: −2.17, 9.01, I2 95.4%) and DBP (pooled mean = 1.16 mmHg, 95% CI: −1.26, 3.58, I2 87.1%). Conclusion Several cuffless BP devices are currently available using different technologies, offering the potential for continuous BP monitoring. The variation in standards and validation protocols limited the comparability of findings across studies and the identification of the most accurate device. Challenges such as validation using standard protocols and in real-life settings must be overcome before they can be recommended for uptake into clinical practice. Graphical Abstract Graphical abstract Wearable BP device system.

Dataset Information

Achieved systolic blood pressure in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Achieved systolic blood pressure in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets