Renal Division, Department of Medicine, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
The George Institute for Global Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Lancet. 2016 Jan 30;387(10017):435-43. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00805-3. Epub 2015 Nov 7.
Recent hypertension guidelines have reversed previous recommendations for lower blood pressure targets in high-risk patients, such as those with cardiovascular disease, renal disease, or diabetes. This change represents uncertainty about whether more intensive blood pressure-lowering strategies are associated with greater reductions in risk of major cardiovascular and renal events. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of intensive blood pressure-lowering strategies.
For this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, we systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for trials published between Jan 1, 1950, and Nov 3, 2015. We included randomised controlled trials with at least 6 months' follow-up that randomly assigned participants to more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering treatment, with different blood pressure targets or different blood pressure changes from baseline. We did not use any age or language restrictions. We did a meta-analysis of blood pressure reductions on relative risk (RR) of major cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death, separately and combined), and non-vascular and all-cause mortality, end-stage kidney disease, and adverse events, as well as albuminuria and progression of retinopathy in trials done in patients with diabetes.
We identified 19 trials including 44,989 participants, in whom 2496 major cardiovascular events were recorded during a mean 3·8 years of follow-up (range 1·0-8·4 years). Our meta-analysis showed that after randomisation, patients in the more intensive blood pressure-lowering treatment group had mean blood pressure levels of 133/76 mm Hg, compared with 140/81 mm Hg in the less intensive treatment group. Intensive blood pressure-lowering treatment achieved RR reductions for major cardiovascular events (14% [95% CI 4-22]), myocardial infarction (13% [0-24]), stroke (22% [10-32]), albuminuria (10% [3-16]), and retinopathy progression (19% [0-34]). However, more intensive treatment had no clear effects on heart failure (15% [95% CI -11 to 34]), cardiovascular death (9% [-11 to 26]), total mortality (9% [-3 to 19]), or end-stage kidney disease (10% [-6 to 23]). The reduction in major cardiovascular events was consistent across patient groups, and additional blood pressure lowering had a clear benefit even in patients with systolic blood pressure lower than 140 mm Hg. The absolute benefits were greatest in trials in which all enrolled patients had vascular disease, renal disease, or diabetes. Serious adverse events associated with blood pressure lowering were only reported by six trials and had an event rate of 1·2% per year in intensive blood pressure-lowering group participants, compared with 0·9% in the less intensive treatment group (RR 1·35 [95% CI 0·93-1·97]). Severe hypotension was more frequent in the more intensive treatment regimen (RR 2·68 [1·21-5·89], p=0·015), but the absolute excess was small (0·3% vs 0·1% per person-year for the duration of follow-up).
Intensive blood pressure lowering provided greater vascular protection than standard regimens. In high-risk patients, there are additional benefits from more intensive blood pressure lowering, including for those with systolic blood pressure below 140 mmHg. The net absolute benefits of intensive blood pressure lowering in high-risk individuals are large.
National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.
最近的高血压指南推翻了之前针对心血管疾病、肾脏疾病或糖尿病等高危患者的较低血压目标的建议。这一变化代表了人们对更强化的降压策略是否与降低主要心血管和肾脏事件风险的相关性存在不确定性。我们旨在评估强化降压策略的疗效和安全性。
在本次更新的系统评价和荟萃分析中,我们系统地检索了 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆中发表于 1950 年 1 月 1 日至 2015 年 11 月 3 日的试验。我们纳入了随访时间至少 6 个月的随机对照试验,这些试验将参与者随机分配到强化降压治疗组和非强化降压治疗组,两组的血压目标或血压变化不同。我们没有使用任何年龄或语言限制。我们对来自糖尿病患者的试验进行了荟萃分析,评估了血压降低对主要心血管事件(心肌梗死、中风、心力衰竭或心血管死亡,分别和合并)、非血管和全因死亡率、终末期肾病和不良事件、以及白蛋白尿和视网膜病变进展的相对风险(RR)的影响。
我们确定了 19 项试验,共纳入了 44989 名参与者,其中在平均 3.8 年的随访期间记录了 2496 例主要心血管事件(范围为 1.0-8.4 年)。我们的荟萃分析显示,随机分组后,强化降压治疗组的患者平均血压水平为 133/76 mmHg,而非强化治疗组为 140/81 mmHg。强化降压治疗可降低主要心血管事件(14%[95%CI 4-22%])、心肌梗死(13%[0-24%])、中风(22%[10-32%])、白蛋白尿(10%[3-16%])和视网膜病变进展(19%[0-34%])的 RR。然而,强化治疗对心力衰竭(15%[95%CI -11 至 34%])、心血管死亡(9%[-11 至 26%])、全因死亡率(9%[-3 至 19%])或终末期肾病(10%[-6 至 23%])没有明显影响。主要心血管事件的减少在各患者组中是一致的,即使在收缩压低于 140 mmHg 的患者中,进一步降低血压也有明显获益。在所有纳入的患者均患有血管疾病、肾脏疾病或糖尿病的试验中,绝对获益最大。与非强化治疗组(0.9%)相比,强化降压治疗组参与者的严重不良事件仅由 6 项试验报告,年发生率为 1.2%(RR 1.35[95%CI 0.93-1.97])。严重低血压在强化治疗组更为常见(RR 2.68[1.21-5.89],p=0.015),但绝对过量很小(在随访期间,强化治疗组和非强化治疗组每人每年的发生率分别为 0.3%和 0.1%)。
强化降压比标准治疗方案提供了更大的血管保护作用。在高危患者中,更强化的降压治疗还具有额外的益处,包括收缩压低于 140 mmHg 的患者。高危个体中强化降压的净绝对获益较大。
澳大利亚国家卫生和医学研究委员会。