Suppr超能文献

高血压指南、荟萃分析与临床试验:我们的假设是否过多?

Hypertension guidelines, meta-analyses and clinical trials: do we assume too much?

作者信息

Peverill Roger E

机构信息

Centre for Heart and Chest Research, Monash University Department of Medicine, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

出版信息

Med J Aust. 2005 Jan 17;182(2):82-4. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06582.x.

Abstract

Given fundamental differences in the recommendations in guidelines from major national and international committees, we cannot rely on them unquestioningly. Different antihypertensive agents are known to have differing effects according to age and race. Exchanging (rather than following guideline recommendations of adding to) an ineffective first-line antihypertensive drug can result in control of hypertension with monotherapy. Conclusions about a preferable first-line antihypertensive agent are limited by trial protocols with varying drug doses and questionable drug combinations. Guidelines are often based on meta-analyses of drugs of a particular class, which could ignore important differences between drugs within a class. Trials of 3-5 years cannot determine the long-term effects of drugs which patients often take for decades.

摘要

鉴于主要国家和国际委员会的指南建议存在根本差异,我们不能毫无质疑地依赖它们。众所周知,不同的抗高血压药物根据年龄和种族会有不同的效果。更换(而非遵循指南中增加药物的建议)无效的一线抗高血压药物可以通过单一疗法控制高血压。关于首选一线抗高血压药物的结论受到试验方案中不同药物剂量和有问题的药物组合的限制。指南通常基于对特定类别的药物进行的荟萃分析,这可能会忽略同一类别药物之间的重要差异。3至5年的试验无法确定患者通常服用数十年的药物的长期效果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验