Lee Michael H, Leda Mariela, Buchan Tayler, Malik Abdullah, Rigobon Alanna, Liu Helen, Daza Julian F, O'Brien Kathleen, Stein Madeleine, Hing Nicholas Ng Fat, Siemeiniuk Reed, Sekercioglu Nigar, Evaniew Nathan, Foroutan Farid, Ross Heather, Alba Ana Carolina
Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Heart Fail Rev. 2022 Mar;27(2):455-464. doi: 10.1007/s10741-021-10086-w. Epub 2021 Mar 8.
Previous primary studies have explored the association between blood pressure (BP) and mortality in ambulatory heart failure (HF) patients reporting varying and contrasting associations. The aim is to determine the pooled BP prognostic value and explore potential reasons for between-study inconsistency. We searched Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and CINAHL from January 2005 to October 2018 for studies with ≥ 50 events (mortality and/or hospitalization) and included BP in a multivariable model in ambulatory HF patients. We pooled hazard ratios (random effects model) for systolic BP (SBP) or diastolic BP (DBP) effect on mortality and/or hospitalization risk. We used a priori defined sub-group analyses to explore heterogeneity and GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. Seventy-one eligible articles (239,467 screened) at low to moderate risk of bias included 235,752 participants. Higher SBP was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (HR 0.93, 95%CI 0.91-0.95, I = 87.13%, moderate certainty), all-cause hospitalization events (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.88-0.93, I = 44.4%, high certainty) and their composite endpoint (HR 0.93 per 10 mmHg, 95%CI 0.91-0.94, I = 86.3%, high certainty). DBP did not demonstrate a statistically significant effect for all outcomes. The association strength was significantly weaker in studies following patients with either LVEF > 40%, higher average SBP (> 130 mmHg), increasing age and diabetes. All other a priori subgroup hypotheses did not explain between study differences. Higher ambulatory SBP is associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization. Patients with lower BP and reduced LVEF are in a high-risk group of developing adverse events with moderate certainty of evidence.
以往的主要研究探讨了动态心力衰竭(HF)患者的血压(BP)与死亡率之间的关联,报告的关联各不相同且相互矛盾。目的是确定合并的血压预后价值,并探讨研究间不一致的潜在原因。我们检索了2005年1月至2018年10月期间的Medline、Cochrane、EMBASE和CINAHL数据库,查找事件(死亡率和/或住院率)≥50例且将血压纳入动态心力衰竭患者多变量模型的研究。我们汇总收缩压(SBP)或舒张压(DBP)对死亡率和/或住院风险影响的风险比(随机效应模型)。我们使用预先定义的亚组分析来探讨异质性,并采用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。71篇低至中度偏倚风险的合格文章(共筛选239,467篇)纳入了235,752名参与者。较高的收缩压与全因死亡率降低相关(HR 0.93,95%CI 0.91 - 0.95,I² = 87.13%,中等确定性)、全因住院事件(HR 0.91,95%CI 0.88 - 0.93,I² = 44.4%,高确定性)及其复合终点(每10 mmHg的HR 0.93,95%CI 0.91 - 0.94,I² = 86.3%)。舒张压对所有结局均未显示出统计学显著影响。在左心室射血分数(LVEF)>40%、平均收缩压较高(>130 mmHg)、年龄增长和糖尿病患者的随访研究中,关联强度明显较弱。所有其他预先定义的亚组假设均无法解释研究间的差异。较高的动态收缩压与全因死亡率和住院风险降低相关。血压较低且左心室射血分数降低的患者发生不良事件的风险较高,证据确定性为中等。