A Meta-analysis of Intensive and Standard Antihypertensive Safety in Elderly Hypertensive Patients

Journal: Journal of Clinical Medicine Research DOI: 10.32629/jcmr.v5i2.2318

Chao Fang1, Nuan Xiao1, Jiannan Wu1, Yuanxin Tian1, Hongmei Zhao1, Simin Ren2

1. Department of Geriatrics, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University/ School of Clinical Medicine, Hebei University, Baoding 071000, Hebei, China
2. Department of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University/ School of Clinical Medicine, Hebei University, Baoding 071000, Hebei, China

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effect of intensive and standard antihypertensive pressure on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, serious adverse events and all-cause deaths in elderly hypertensive patients. Methods: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI, Wanfang and CBM databases were searched. All of the included studies were the RCT trials. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were used to evaluate differences in enhanced and standard antihypertensive outcomes. Statistical analysis was applied using the Stata 17.0 software. Results: Seven tests were retrieved to meet the conditions, Different antihypertensive effects showed overall statistical differences in the incidence of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, Significant decrease in the intensive antihypertensive group [P=0.000, RR95%CI:0.79(0.69-0.90)], Among them, the incidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was significantly reduced in the intensive antihypertensive group [P=0.000, RR95%CI:0.62(0.48-0.81)], The incidence of stroke events was significantly fewer in the intensive group [P=0.000, RR95%CI:0.62(0.48-0.81)]; There was no significant difference in the incidence of acute HF (AHF) between the two groups [P=0.242, RR95%CI:0.55(0.20-1.50)]. There was no significant statistical difference in the incidence of serious adverse events overall by different antihypertensive criteria [P=0.251,RR95%CI:1.12(0.92-1.36)], of which two groups were eGFR<30ml/min/1.73m2There was no significant statistical difference in the incidence [P=0.280,RR95%CI:1.46(0.74-2.89)], no significant statistical difference in the incidence of orthostatic hypotension [P=0.473,RR95%CI:1.47(0.51-4.23)], no significant statistical difference in the incidence of falls [P=0.607,RR95%CI:1.24(0.54-42.86)], and the incidence of syncope in the intensive antihypertensive group was higher than that in the standard antihypertensive group [P=0.009,RR95%CI:2.43(1.24-4.77)]. There was no significant statistical difference in the effect of different antihypertensive criteria on all-cause death [P=0.156,RR95%CI:0.92(0.81-1.03)]. Conclusion: Compared with the standard antihypertensive in elderly patients with hypertension, there is no significant statistical difference in the incidence of serious adverse events and all-cause mortality in the elderly, and the incidence of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the elderly.

Keywords

old age; intensive antihypertensive; safety; meta-analysis

Funding

Hebei Provincial Department of Education / Hebei University Graduate Innovation Ability Training Funding Project (Project No. HBU2023SS004); Self-raised Funding Project of Baoding Science and Technology Plan (Project No.2341ZF145)

References

[1] Chinese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension (revised in 2018) [J]. Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine, 2019,24 (01): 24-56.
[2] WheltonPK, et al A CC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.J Am Coll Cardiol.2018 May 15;71(19):e127-e248. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.006.
[3] Leung AA, et al .Hypertension Canada's 2016 Canadian Hypertension Education Program Guidelines for Blood Pressure Measurement, Diagnosis, Assessment of Risk, Prevention, and Treatment of Hypertension.Can J Cardiol.2016 May;32(5):569-88. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2016.02.066.
[4] Fan J, et al .Effects of intensive vs.standard blood pressure control on cognitive function:Post-hoc analysis of the STEP randomized controlled trial.Front Neurol.2023 Feb 1;14:1042637. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1042637.
[5] Williamson JD, et al .Effect of Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control on Probable Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA.2019 Feb 12;321(6):553-561. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.21442.
[6] Forette F, et al .Prevention of dementia in randomised double-blind placebo-controlled Systolic HypertensioninEurope (Syst-Eur) trial.Lancet.1998 Oct 24;352(9137):1347-51. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(98)03086-4.
[7] Bath PM, et al .Intensive versus Guideline Blood Pressure and Lipid Lowering in Patients with Previous Stroke: Main Results from the Pilot 'Prevention of Decline in Cognition after Stroke Trial' (PODCAST) Randomised Controlled Trial.PLoS One.2017 Jan 17;12(1):e0164608. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164608.
[8] Cushman WC, et al .Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.N Engl J Med.2010 Apr 29;362(17):1575-85. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1001286.
[9] White WB, et al .I n tensive versus standard ambulatory blood pressure lowering to prevent functional DeclINe in the ElderlY (INFINITY).Am Heart J.2013 Mar;165(3):258-265.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.11.008.
[10] Benavente OR, et al .Blood-pressure targets in patients with recent lacunar stroke: the SPS3 randomised trial.Lancet.2013 Aug 10;382(9891):507-15. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60852-1.

Copyright © 2024 Chao Fang, Nuan Xiao, Jiannan Wu, Yuanxin Tian, Hongmei Zhao, Simin Ren

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License