Hypertension Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease of China, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beilishi Rd. 167, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100037, China.
The Hospital of Shunyi District Beijing, Beijing, 101300, China.
BMC Med. 2022 Oct 20;20(1):358. doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02556-1.
The benefits and risks of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment in older patients with arterial stiffness (AS) remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the interaction between the baseline AS and SBP treatments on cardiovascular outcomes.
In this post hoc analysis of the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial, we involved 6865 participants with complete data regarding baseline brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV). Patients were categorized by baseline AS status (AS, baPWV ≥ 1800 cm/s; non-AS, baPWV < 1800 cm/s). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular events. The secondary outcomes were stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), major cardiovascular events (MACE), and all-cause death. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for the outcomes.
During a mean follow-up of 2.69 years, a total of 248 primary outcome events and 81 all-cause deaths occurred. The hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54-1.09) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.43-0.92) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.43), and that for stroke was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.33-1.02) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.23-0.99) in the AS and non-AS groups, respectively (P for interaction = 0.68). Effects of intensive SBP treatment on safety outcomes and all-cause death were also similar in the two groups (P for interaction > 0.05 for all).
In the STEP trial, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those in the AS group and the non-AS group at baseline.
STEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03015311. Registered 2 January 2017.
强化与标准收缩压(SBP)治疗对动脉僵硬(AS)老年患者的益处和风险仍不清楚。本研究旨在探讨基线 AS 与 SBP 治疗对心血管结局的相互作用。
在老年高血压患者血压干预策略(STEP)试验的事后分析中,我们纳入了 6865 名具有完整基线臂踝脉搏波速度(baPWV)数据的参与者。根据基线 AS 状态(AS,baPWV≥1800cm/s;非 AS,baPWV<1800cm/s)对患者进行分类。主要结局是心血管事件的综合指标。次要结局为卒中、急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)、主要心血管事件(MACE)和全因死亡。Cox 回归用于计算结局的风险比。
在平均 2.69 年的随访期间,共有 248 例主要结局事件和 81 例全因死亡发生。在 AS 组和非 AS 组,主要结局的风险比分别为 0.76(95%置信区间(CI),0.54-1.09)和 0.63(95%CI,0.43-0.92)(P 交互=0.43),卒中的风险比分别为 0.58(95%CI,0.33-1.02)和 0.48(95%CI,0.23-0.99)(P 交互=0.68)。两组强化 SBP 治疗对安全性结局和全因死亡的影响也相似(P 交互>0.05)。
在 STEP 试验中,强化 SBP 治疗在基线时对 AS 组和非 AS 组的有益效果相似。
STEP ClinicalTrials.gov 编号,NCT03015311。2017 年 1 月 2 日注册。