Effects of Intensive Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Evident Cardiovascular Disease: An Investigation Using the SPRINT Study Data.

Pubmed ID: 29512468

Journal: Current vascular pharmacology

Publication Date: Jan. 1, 2019

Affiliation: Hypertension and Cardiometabolic Unit, First Department of Cardiology, Hippokration Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Link: http://www.eurekaselect.com/160225/article

MeSH Terms: Humans, Male, Female, Aged, Cardiovascular Diseases, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Risk Factors, Middle Aged, Hypertension, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Risk Assessment, Treatment Outcome, Blood Pressure, Time Factors, Health Status, Antihypertensive Agents

Authors: Vlachopoulos C, Terentes-Printzios D, Aznaouridis K, Ioakeimidis N, Xaplanteris P, Lazaros G, Tousoulis D

Cite As: Vlachopoulos C, Terentes-Printzios D, Aznaouridis K, Ioakeimidis N, Xaplanteris P, Lazaros G, Tousoulis D. Effects of Intensive Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Evident Cardiovascular Disease: An Investigation Using the SPRINT Study Data. Curr Vasc Pharmacol 2019;17(3):298-306.

Studies:

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent data advocate adoption of a more intensive treatment strategy for management of blood pressure (BP). OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether the overall effects of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) are applicable to cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients. METHODS: In a post hoc analysis we analyzed data from SPRINT that randomly assigned 9361 individuals to a systolic BP (SBP) target of <120 mmHg (intensive treatment) or <140 mmHg (standard treatment). 1562 patients had clinically evident CVD (age=70.3±9.3 years, 24% females) at study entry and were followed for 3.1 years. Further, we assessed the effect of low (<150 mmHg) baseline SBP on outcome. RESULTS: In CVD patients, there was no benefit from the intensive treatment regarding all endpoints, except for a marginally significant benefit on all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 1.00; p=0.0509). Further, while there was no increase in serious adverse events (SAE) in the intensive group, there was increased risk for study-related SAE, acute renal failure and electrolyte abnormalities. In patients with low baseline SBP there was a beneficial effect on allcause mortality (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.96; p=0.033), but with greater stroke incidence (HR: 2.94; 95% CI: 1.04 to 8.29; p=0.042). CONCLUSION: We confirm the beneficial effect of the intensive strategy in SPRINT study on all-cause mortality and the harmful effect on specific adverse outcomes in patients with CVD. However, in patients with low baseline SBP stroke may increase.