Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BackgroundIntensive blood pressure lowering is increasingly gaining attention. In addition to higher baseline blood pressure, cumulative SBP, visit-to-visit variability, and treatment-induced serious adverse events (SAEs) could impact treatment efficacy over time. Our aim was to assess the impact of cumulative SBP and SAEs on intensive hypertension treatment efficacy in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) population during follow-up.MethodsSecondary analysis of the SPRINT study: a randomized, controlled, open-label trial including 102 clinical sites in the United States. We included 9068 SPRINT participants with 128 139 repeated SBP measurements. Participants were randomly assigned to intensive (target SBP < 120 mmHg) versus standard treatment (target SBP between 135 and 139 mmHg). We used cumulative joint models for longitudinal and survival data analysis. Primary outcome was a composite outcome of myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, acute decompensated heart failure, stroke, and cardiovascular mortality.ResultsAlthough intensive treatment decreased the risk for the primary SPRINT outcome at the start of follow-up, its effect lost significance after 3.4 years of follow-up in the total SPRINT population and after 1.3, 1.3, 1.1, 1.8, 2.1, 1.8, and 3.4 years among participants with prevalent chronic kidney disease, prevalent cardiovascular disease, women, black individuals, participants less than 75 years, those with baseline SBP more than 132 mmHg, and individuals who suffered SAEs during follow-up, respectively.ConclusionThe initial beneficial impact of intensive hypertension treatment might be offset by cumulative SBP and development of SAEs during follow-up.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1097/hjh.0000000000002001

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2019-05-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

37

Pages

1058 - 1069

Total pages

11

Addresses

D, e, p, a, r, t, m, e, n, t, , o, f, , E, p, i, d, e, m, i, o, l, o, g, y, ,, , E, r, a, s, m, u, s, , M, C, , -, , U, n, i, v, e, r, s, i, t, y, , M, e, d, i, c, a, l, , C, e, n, t, e, r, , R, o, t, t, e, r, d, a, m, ,, , R, o, t, t, e, r, d, a, m, ,, , T, h, e, , N, e, t, h, e, r, l, a, n, d, s, .

Keywords

Humans, Myocardial Infarction, Hypertension, Antihypertensive Agents, Treatment Outcome, Prevalence, Survival Rate, Follow-Up Studies, Age Factors, Sex Factors, Blood Pressure, Systole, Time Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Middle Aged, United States, Female, Male, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic, Heart Failure, Stroke, Acute Coronary Syndrome, Black or African American