Staessen J A, Wang J G, Thijs L
Studiecoördinatiecentrum, Hypertensie en Cardiovasculaire Revalidatie Eenheid, Departement Moleculair en Cardiovasculair Onderzoek, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Lancet. 2001 Oct 20;358(9290):1305-15. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06411-X.
Whether antihypertensive drugs offer cardiovascular protection beyond blood pressure lowering has not been established. We aimed to investigate whether pharmacological properties of antihypertensive drugs or reduction of systolic pressure accounted for cardiovascular outcome in hypertensive or high-risk patients.
In a meta-analysis we extracted summary statistics from published reports, and calculated pooled odds ratios for experimental versus reference treatment. We correlated across-trials odd ratios for differences in systolic pressure between groups.
We analysed nine randomised trials comparing treatments in 62605 hypertensive patients. Compared with old drugs (diuretics and b-blockers), calcium-channel blockers and angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors offered similar overall cardiovascular protection, but calcium-channel blockers provided more reduction in the risk of stroke (13.5%, 95% CI 1.3-24.2, p=0.03) and less reduction in the risk of myocardial infarction (19.2%, 3.5-37.3, p=0.01). Heterogeneity was significant between trials because of high risk of cardiovascular events on doxazosin in one trial, and high risk of stroke on captopril in another; but systolic pressure differed between groups in these two trials by 2-3 mm Hg. Similar systolic differences occurred in a trial of diltiazem versus old drugs, and in three trials of converting-enzyme inhibitor against placebo in high-risk patients. Meta-regression across 27 trials (136124 patients) showed that odds ratios could be explained by achieved differences in systolic pressure.
Our findings emphasise that blood pressure control is important. All antihypertensive drugs have similar long-term efficacy and safety. Calcium-channel blockers might be especially effective in stroke prevention. We did not find that converting-enzyme inhibitors or a-blockers affect cardiovascular prognosis beyond their antihypertensive effects.
降压药物除降低血压外是否还具有心血管保护作用尚未明确。我们旨在研究降压药物的药理特性或收缩压降低是否能解释高血压或高危患者的心血管结局。
在一项荟萃分析中,我们从已发表的报告中提取汇总统计数据,并计算试验组与参照治疗组的合并比值比。我们对各试验中两组收缩压差异的比值比进行了相关性分析。
我们分析了9项随机试验,比较了62605例高血压患者的治疗情况。与旧药(利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂)相比,钙通道阻滞剂和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂提供了相似的总体心血管保护作用,但钙通道阻滞剂降低中风风险的效果更显著(13.5%,95%置信区间1.3 - 24.2,p = 0.03),而降低心肌梗死风险的效果较差(19.2%,3.5 - 37.3,p = 0.01)。各试验之间存在显著异质性,原因是一项试验中多沙唑嗪的心血管事件风险高,另一项试验中卡托普利的中风风险高;但这两项试验中两组的收缩压相差2 - 3 mmHg。在一项地尔硫䓬与旧药对比的试验以及三项高危患者中血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂与安慰剂对比的试验中也出现了类似的收缩压差异。对27项试验(136124例患者)进行的Meta回归分析表明,比值比可由收缩压的实际差异来解释。
我们的研究结果强调血压控制很重要。所有降压药物都具有相似的长期疗效和安全性。钙通道阻滞剂在预防中风方面可能特别有效。我们没有发现血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂或α受体阻滞剂除降压作用外还会影响心血管预后。