J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 May 15;71(19):2176-2198. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.004. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
OBJECTIVE: To review the literature systematically and perform meta-analyses to address these questions: 1) Is there evidence that self-measured blood pressure (BP) without other augmentation is superior to office-based measurement of BP for achieving better BP control or for preventing adverse clinical outcomes that are related to elevated BP? 2) What is the optimal target for BP lowering during antihypertensive therapy in adults? 3) In adults with hypertension, how do various antihypertensive drug classes differ in their benefits and harms compared with each other as first-line therapy? METHODS: Electronic literature searches were performed by Doctor Evidence, a global medical evidence software and services company, across PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to 2015 using key words and relevant subject headings for randomized controlled trials that met eligibility criteria defined for each question. We performed analyses using traditional frequentist statistical and Bayesian approaches, including random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses. RESULTS: Our results suggest that: 1) There is a modest but significant improvement in systolic BP in randomized controlled trials of self-measured BP versus usual care at 6 but not 12 months, and for selected patients and their providers self-measured BP may be a helpful adjunct to routine office care. 2) systolic BP lowering to a target of <130 mm Hg may reduce the risk of several important outcomes including risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and major cardiovascular events. No class of medications (i.e., angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, or beta blockers) was significantly better than thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics as a first-line therapy for any outcome.
目的:系统回顾文献并进行荟萃分析,以解答以下问题:1)自我测量血压(BP)而不采用其他增强方法是否比诊室测量 BP 更有助于控制血压或预防与血压升高相关的不良临床结局?2)在降压治疗中,成年人的血压降低最佳目标值是多少?3)在高血压成年人中,与其他降压药物相比,各种降压药物类别作为一线治疗药物的疗效和安全性有何不同?
方法:全球医学证据软件和服务公司 Doctor Evidence 通过电子文献检索,在 1966 年至 2015 年间,使用关键词和相关主题词,在 PubMed 和 EMBASE 中对符合每个问题定义的纳入标准的随机对照试验进行了文献搜索。我们使用传统的频率论统计和贝叶斯方法进行了分析,包括随机效应贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
结果:我们的研究结果表明:1)与常规护理相比,自我测量 BP 的随机对照试验在 6 个月而非 12 个月时收缩压有适度但显著的改善,对于某些患者及其医务人员而言,自我测量 BP 可能是常规诊室护理的有益辅助手段。2)收缩压降低至<130 mm Hg 可能会降低包括心肌梗死、卒中等多种重要结局的风险,心力衰竭和主要心血管事件。与噻嗪类利尿剂相比,没有任何一类药物(即血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂、血管紧张素受体阻滞剂、钙通道阻滞剂或β受体阻滞剂)作为一线治疗药物在任何结局上都具有显著优势。
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024-8-27
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023-6-21
Nutrients. 2023-2-15
Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2021-11-29
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017-2-7
Med Clin North Am. 2017-1