Suppr超能文献

老年人伴或不伴糖尿病患者强化与标准血压控制的比较:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Intensive versus standard blood pressure control in older persons with or without diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

机构信息

Diabetes Research Centre, College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK.

NIHR Applied Research Collaboration - East Midlands, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK.

出版信息

J R Soc Med. 2023 Apr;116(4):133-143. doi: 10.1177/01410768231156997. Epub 2023 Feb 24.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare the benefits and harms of intensive versus standard blood pressure (BP) control in older people with or without diabetes mellitus (DM).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Randomised controlled trials comparing intensive versus standard BP control, identified from MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane library, Web of Science and a search of bibliographies from inception till August 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Older people (≥65 years) with or without DM.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Study-specific risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for adverse vascular and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

We included six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 20,985 patients (intensive BP = 10,474 and standard BP = 10,511) with a weighted mean follow-up of 3.1 years. In the general population, the RRs (95% CIs) of intensive versus standard BP control for composite cardiovascular events or major adverse cardiovascular events (CVD/MACE), CVD mortality, coronary heart disease, stroke and heart failure were 0.71 (0.62-0.82), 0.65 (0.49-0.86), 0.75 (0.60-0.95), 0.75 (0.61-0.92) and 0.58 (0.41-0.82), respectively. Intensive BP control did not increase the risk of renal failure or serious adverse events in the general population. Two RCTs reported results for composite CVD/MACE in patients with DM with a pooled estimate of 0.85 (0.67-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Aggregate trial evidence shows that intensive BP control (<120 to <140 mmHg) reduces the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in older hypertensive patients in the general population with no increase in adverse events. Intensive BP control may confer similar benefits for older patients with DM with no evidence for harm, but this is based on limited data.PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022349791.

摘要

目的

评估和比较强化与标准血压(BP)控制对有或无糖尿病(DM)的老年人的益处和危害。

设计

系统评价和荟萃分析。

设置

从 MEDLINE、Embase、The Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science 和 2022 年 8 月为止的文献目录中检索比较强化与标准 BP 控制的随机对照试验。

参与者

有或无 DM 的老年人(≥65 岁)。

主要观察结果

针对不良血管和安全性结局,汇总了研究特异性风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

我们纳入了 6 项随机对照试验(RCT),共纳入 20985 例患者(强化 BP=10474 例,标准 BP=10511 例),加权平均随访时间为 3.1 年。在一般人群中,强化 BP 与标准 BP 控制相比,复合心血管事件或主要心血管不良事件(CVD/MACE)、CVD 死亡率、冠心病、卒中和心力衰竭的 RR(95%CI)分别为 0.71(0.62-0.82)、0.65(0.49-0.86)、0.75(0.60-0.95)、0.75(0.61-0.92)和 0.58(0.41-0.82)。强化 BP 控制并未增加一般人群中肾衰竭或严重不良事件的风险。两项 RCT 报告了糖尿病患者复合 CVD/MACE 的结果,汇总估计值为 0.85(0.67-1.07)。

结论

综合试验证据表明,强化 BP 控制(<120 至 <140mmHg)可降低一般人群中高血压老年患者不良心血管结局的风险,且不会增加不良事件。强化 BP 控制可能对无不良事件证据的糖尿病老年患者带来类似的益处,但这基于有限的数据。

PROSPERO 注册:CRD42022349791。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/335e/10164272/85a36e8609ff/10.1177_01410768231156997-fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验