| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Andersson, Therese, 1983-
(författare)
-
Acute Pulmonary Embolism : not just an acute condition after all
- 2022
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most common cardiovascular disease following myocardial infarction and stroke. Despite diagnostic improvements, the diagnosis of PE is still associated with many difficulties, as the symptoms of an acute PE are nonspecific. Even though an acute PE is associated with a high short-term mortality, less attention has been given to long-term mortality. In addition, the clinical course following an acute PE may be accompanied by substantial morbidity, and one feared complication is chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), a progressive pulmonary vasculopathy. In addition to CTEPH, increasing evidence suggests that a large proportion of patients report persistent functional impairment several years after an acute PE. Recently, the term chronic thromboembolic pulmonary disease (CTEPD) has been proposed for those with remaining symptoms and signs of residual thrombotic material in the pulmonary arteries. Methods and Results: A nation-wide Swedish cohort of all patients (n= 5793) diagnosed with an acute PE in 2005 was identified. The incidence of PE was 0.6/1000 person-years, and during a 4-year follow-up, the mortality was more than doubled compared with an age- and sex-matched control group. We found that the acute PE associated with multiple comorbidities, and with cardiovascular diseases in particular. All surviving patients in 2007 (n=3510) were invited to answer a questionnaire regarding dyspnea and related comorbidities. We demonstrated a substantially higher prevalence of both exertional dyspnea (53.0% vs. 17.3%) and wake-up dyspnea (12% vs. 1.7%) in patients compared to controls from the Northern Sweden MONICA study. Furthermore, PE associated independently with dyspnea in a multivariable analysis. Through a manual review of approximately 10 % of the patient’s medical records, a positive predictive value of 79% was found for the PE diagnosis. Post-PE patients with remaining dyspnea and/or previously known risk factors for CTEPH development were referred for blood sampling and levels of N-terminal (NT)-prohormone (pro) brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) were determined. Thereafter, they were referred to their local hospital for a pulmonary ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scintigraphy and echocardiography. Approximately 45% of the V/Q-scans showed perfusion defects and 27 % of echocardiographies showed signs of pulmonary hypertension. In total, 24 cases of CTEPH were identified, resulting in a prevalence of 0.4 % (95 % confidence interval 0.2 %–0.6 %). Conclusion: An acute PE is a serious event, associated with decreased survival, multiple comorbidities, frequent dyspnea, and pathological investigational findings. The term CTEPD seems reasonable as it captures that this is a disease of the pulmonary vasculature, and that pharmacological and surgical interventions used for CTEPH may be useful. Regardless, proper follow-up after acute PE is essential for timely identification of patients in need of appropriate investigations and care.
|
|
| 4. |
- Andersson, Therese, 1983-, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term sequelae following acute pulmonary embolism : a nationwide follow-up study regarding the incidence of CTEPH, dyspnea, echocardiographic and V/Q scan abnormalities
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Pulmonary Circulation. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2045-8932 .- 2045-8940. ; 13:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We aimed to follow a nationwide cohort of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) without any exclusions to generate information regarding long-term symptoms, investigational findings and to determine the prevalence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). We hypothesized that this approach would yield generalizable estimates of CTEPH prevalence and incidence. All individuals diagnosed with acute PE in Sweden in 2005 were identified using the National Patient Register. In 2007, survivors were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding current symptoms. Those with dyspnea were referred for further examinations with laboratory tests, electrocardiogram (ECG), and a ventilation/perfusion scan (V/Q scan). If CTEPH was suspected, a referral to the nearest pulmonary arterial hypertension-center was recommended. Of 5793 unique individuals with PE diagnosis in 2005, 3510 were alive at the beginning of 2007. Altogether 53% reported dyspnea at some degree whereof a large proportion had V/Q scans indicating mismatched defects. Further investigation revealed 6 cases of CTEPH and in parallel 18 cases were diagnosed outside this study. The overall prevalence of CTEPH was 0.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2%–0.6%) and 0.7% (95% CI: 0.4%–1.0%) among the survivors. The cumulative incidence of CTEPH in the group of patients who underwent a V/Q scan was 1.1% (95% CI: 0.2%–2.0%). There was a high mortality following an acute PE, a high proportion of persistent dyspnea among survivors, whereof several had pathological findings on V/Q scans and echocardiography. Only a minority developed CTEPH, indicating that CTEPH is the tip of the iceberg of post-PE disturbances.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Andersson, Therese, et al.
(författare)
-
Validation of the Swedish National Inpatient Register for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in 2005
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Pulmonary Circulation. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2045-8932 .- 2045-8940. ; 12:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Swedish National Inpatient Register (NPR) has near-complete coverage of in-hospital admissions and ICD codes in Sweden. Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a serious condition presenting challenges regarding diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Here we aimed to validate the accuracy of acute PE diagnosis in the NPR, investigational findings, antithrombotic treatment, and follow-up of PE patients in Sweden. From a nation-wide cohort of all patients with in-hospital diagnoses of acute PE (ICD-10-SE codes I26.0–I26.9) in 2005 (n = 5793), we selected those from two Swedish regions for thorough manual review of hospital records. We identified 599 patients with PE diagnoses according to the ICD-10 coding system. We excluded 58 patients with admissions related to previous PE (47; 8%) or incorrect ICD codes (11; 2%), leaving 501 patients with probable PE diagnoses. We confirmed the diagnosis in 441 (79%) cases, which was based on imaging (435 patients; 73%) or autopsy (6; 1%). In the remaining 60 (11%) cases, the PE diagnosis was based on clinical findings and can therefore not be confirmed. Of the surviving patients with PE, 231 (47%) were offered follow-up within 6 months after the acute event. At follow-up, 67 patients (29%) had symptoms requiring clinical attention (dyspnoea or reduced general condition). The Swedish NPR showed acceptable accuracy for PE diagnosis, and could be reliably used for register-based research regarding acute PE.
|
|
| 7. |
- Appelros, Peter, 1953-, et al.
(författare)
-
Thrombolysis in acute stroke
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 385:9976, s. 1394-1394
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 8. |
- Asplund, Kjell, et al.
(författare)
-
Stroke in the elderly
- 1999
-
Ingår i: Cerebrovascular Diseases. - 1015-9770 .- 1421-9786. ; 2, s. 152-157
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 9. |
- Bengtsson, Anna, 1973-, et al.
(författare)
-
The beneficial effect over 3 years by pictorial information to patients and their physician about subclinical atherosclerosis and cardiovascular risk : results from the VIPVIZA randomized clinical trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Preventive Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 2666-6677. ; 7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: Non-adherence to guidelines and preventive measures is a major challenge, particularly so to ob- tain long-term adherence to lifestyle changes and recommended medication. The objective was to investigate if pictorial information regarding subclinical carotid atherosclerosis provided to individuals and physicians gave sustained effects on cardiovascular risk beyond the previously reported effect after 1 year and up to 3 years. Methods: A Prospective Randomized Open Blinded End-point (PROBE) trial. Within a CVD prevention program in Västerbotten County, Sweden, 3532 healthy individuals aged 40, 50 or 60 years were enrolled and 1:1 ran- domized to intervention ( n = 1749; pictorial information with additional prevention materials to participants and physicians) or control group ( n = 1783; no pictorial information to participants and physicians). Preventive measures were managed within primary care. Participants were investigated at baseline during 2013–2016 and at follow-up after 1 and 3 years. Results: A beneficial effect on cardiovascular risk was observed at 3-year follow-up; Framingham Risk Score (FRS) was 13.38 for the intervention group and 14.08 for the control group ( p = 0.047) and SCORE was 1.69 vs. 1.82 ( p = 0.022). The effect observed at 1-year was sustained over 3 years after adjustment for sex and education and more pronounced among participants with a severe atherosclerotic picture at baseline.Conclusions: This study provides evidence of sustained beneficial effects on the adherence to prevention guidelines over 3 years of pictorial information about subclinical carotid atherosclerosis, resulting in lower cardiovascular risk regardless of sex and educational level. Direct visualization of the underlying still subclinical atherosclerotic disease, rather than just indirect information about risk factors and statistical risk of future myocardial infarction, stroke and death, is one way to tackle the problem of non-adherence to prevention of cardiovascular diseases.
|
|
| 10. |
- Blanton, Michael R., et al.
(författare)
-
Sloan Digital Sky Survey IV : Mapping the Milky Way, Nearby Galaxies, and the Distant Universe
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Astronomical Journal. - : IOP Publishing Ltd. - 0004-6256 .- 1538-3881. ; 154:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We describe the Sloan Digital Sky Survey IV (SDSS-IV), a project encompassing three major spectroscopic programs. The Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment 2 (APOGEE-2) is observing hundreds of thousands of Milky Way stars at high resolution and. high signal-to-noise ratios in the near-infrared. The Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory (MaNGA) survey is obtaining spatially resolved spectroscopy for thousands of nearby galaxies (median z similar to 0.03). The extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (eBOSS) is mapping the galaxy, quasar, and neutral gas distributions between z similar to 0.6 and 3.5 to constrain cosmology using baryon acoustic oscillations, redshift space distortions, and the shape of the power spectrum. Within eBOSS, we are conducting two major subprograms: the SPectroscopic IDentification of eROSITA Sources (SPIDERS), investigating X-ray AGNs. and galaxies in X-ray clusters, and the Time Domain Spectroscopic Survey (TDSS), obtaining spectra of variable sources. All programs use the 2.5 m Sloan Foundation Telescope at the. Apache Point Observatory; observations there began in Summer 2014. APOGEE-2 also operates a second near-infrared spectrograph at the 2.5 m du Pont Telescope at Las Campanas Observatory, with observations beginning in early 2017. Observations at both facilities are scheduled to continue through 2020. In keeping with previous SDSS policy, SDSS-IV provides regularly scheduled public data releases; the first one, Data Release 13, was made available in 2016 July.
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Association of blood pressure lowering with mortality and cardiovascular disease across blood pressure levels : a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2018
-
Ingår i: JAMA Internal Medicine. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6106 .- 2168-6114. ; 178:1, s. 28-36
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: High blood pressure (BP) is the most important risk factor for death and cardiovascular disease (CVD) worldwide. The optimal cutoff for treatment of high BP is debated.Objective: To assess the association between BP lowering treatment and death and CVD at different BP levels.Data sources: Previous systematic reviews were identified from PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect. Reference lists of these reviews were searched for randomized clinical trials. Randomized clinical trials published after November 1, 2015, were also searched for in PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials during February 2017.Study selection: Randomized clinical trials with at least 1000 patient-years of follow-up, comparing BP-lowering drugs vs placebo or different BP goals were included.Data extraction and synthesis: Data were extracted from original publications. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaborations assessment tool. Relative risks (RRs) were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses with Knapp-Hartung modification. Results are reported according to PRISMA guidelines.Main outcomes and measures: Prespecified outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure, and end-stage renal disease.Results: Seventy-four unique trials, representing 306 273 unique participants (39.9% women and 60.1% men; mean age, 63.6 years) and 1.2 million person-years, were included in the meta-analyses. In primary prevention, the association of BP-lowering treatment with major cardiovascular events was dependent on baseline systolic BP (SBP). In trials with baseline SBP 160 mm Hg or above, treatment was associated with reduced risk for death (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-1.00) and a substantial reduction of major cardiovascular events (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.87). If baseline SBP ranged from 140 to 159 mm Hg, the association of treatment with mortality was similar (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00), but the association with major cardiovascular events was less pronounced (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96). In trials with baseline SBP below 140 mm Hg, treatment was not associated with mortality (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.90-1.06) and major cardiovascular events (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04). In trials including people with previous CHD and mean baseline SBP of 138 mm Hg, treatment was associated with reduced risk for major cardiovascular events (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97), but was not associated with survival (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.07).Conclusions and relevance: Primary preventive BP lowering is associated with reduced risk for death and CVD if baseline SBP is 140 mm Hg or higher. At lower BP levels, treatment is not associated with any benefit in primary prevention but might offer additional protection in patients with CHD.
|
|
| 13. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Association of education and feedback on hypertension management with risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Blood Pressure. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0803-7051 .- 1651-1999. ; 31:1, s. 31-39
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose Education and feedback on hypertension management has been associated with improved hypertension control. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of such interventions to reduce the risk of stroke and cardiovascular events. Materials and Methods Individuals >= 18 years with a blood pressure (BP) recording in Vasterbotten or Sodermanland County during the study period 2001 to 2009 were included in 108 serial cohort studies, each with 24 months follow-up. The primary outcome was risk of first-ever stroke in Vasterbotten County (intervention) compared with Sodermanland County (control). Secondary outcomes were first-ever major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), myocardial infarction, and heart failure, as well as all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. All outcomes were analysed using time-to-event data included in a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, systolic BP at inclusion, marital status, and disposable income. Results A total of 121 365 individuals (mean [SD] age at inclusion 61.7 [16.3] years; 59.9% female; mean inclusion BP 142.3/82.6 mmHg) in the intervention county were compared to 131 924 individuals (63.6 [16.2] years; 61.2% female; 144.1/81.1 mmHg) in the control county. A first-ever stroke occurred in 2 823 (2.3%) individuals in the intervention county, and 3 584 (2.7%) individuals in the control county (adjusted hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03). No differences were observed for MACE, myocardial infarction or heart failure, whereas all-cause mortality (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.95) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.98) were lower in the intervention county. Conclusions This study does not support an association between education and feedback on hypertension management to primary care physicians and the risk for stroke or cardiovascular outcomes. The observed differences for mortality outcomes should be interpreted with caution.
|
|
| 14. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Association of physician education and feedback on hypertension management with patient blood pressure and hypertension control
- 2020
-
Ingår i: JAMA Network Open. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2574-3805. ; 3:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) is the most important risk factor for premature death worldwide. However, hypertension detection and control rates continue to be suboptimal.To assess the association of education and feedback to primary care physicians with population-level SBP and hypertension control rates.This pooled series of 108 population-based cohort studies involving 283 079 patients used data from primary care centers in 2 counties (Västerbotten and Södermanland) in Sweden from 2001 to 2009. Participants were individuals aged 18 years or older who had their blood pressure (BP) measured and recorded in either county during the intervention period. All analyses were performed in February 2019.An intervention comprising education and feedback for primary care physicians in Västerbotten County (intervention group) compared with usual care in Södermanland County (control group).Difference in mean SBP levels between counties and likelihood of hypertension control in the intervention county compared with the control county during 24 months of follow-up.A total of 136 541 unique individuals (mean [SD] age at inclusion, 64.6 [16.1] years; 57.0% female; mean inclusion BP, 142/82 mm Hg) in the intervention county were compared with 146 538 individuals (mean [SD] age at inclusion, 65.7 [15.9] years; 58.3% female; mean inclusion BP, 144/80 mm Hg) in the control county. Mean SBP difference between counties during follow-up, adjusted for inclusion BP and other covariates, was 1.1 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.0-1.1 mm Hg). Hypertension control improved by 8.4 percentage points, and control was achieved in 37.8% of participants in the intervention county compared with 29.4% in the control county (adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.29-1.31). Differences between counties increased during the intervention period and were more pronounced in participants with higher SBP at inclusion. Results were consistent across all subgroups.This study suggests that SBP levels and hypertension control rates in a county population may be improved by educational approaches directed at physicians and other health care workers. Similar strategies may be adopted to reinforce the implementation of clinical practice guidelines for hypertension management.
|
|
| 15. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Benefits and harms of lower blood pressure treatment targets : systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials
- 2019
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 9:9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To assess the effect of antihypertensive treatment in the 130-140mm Hg systolic blood pressure range. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Information sources PubMed, CDSR and DARE were searched for the systematic reviews, which were manually browsed for clinical trials. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for trials directly in February 2018. Eligibility criteria Randomised double-blind trials with >= 1000 patient-years of follow-up, comparing any antihypertensive agent against placebo. Data extraction and risk of bias Two reviewers extracted study-level data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane Collaborations risk of bias assessment tool, independently. Main outcomes and measures Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events and discontinuation due to adverse events. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, hypotension-related adverse events and renal impairment. Results Eighteen trials, including 92 567 participants (34% women, mean age 63 years), fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Primary preventive antihypertensive treatment was associated with a neutral effect on all-cause mortality (relative risk 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.06) and major cardiovascular events (1.01, 0.96 to 1.06), but an increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (1.23, 1.03 to 1.47). None of the secondary efficacy outcomes were significantly reduced, but the risk of hypotension-related adverse events increased with treatment (1.71, 1.32 to 2.22). In coronary artery disease secondary prevention, antihypertensive treatment was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality (0.91, 0.83 to 0.99) and major cardiovascular events (0.85, 0.77 to 0.94), but doubled the risk of adverse events leading to discontinuation (2.05, 1.62 to 2.61). Conclusion Primary preventive blood pressure lowering in the 130-140mm Hg systolic blood pressure range adds no cardiovascular benefit, but increases the risk of adverse events. In the secondary prevention, benefits should be weighed against harms.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood pressure targets in type 2 diabetes : a general perspective
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Cardiovascular Endocrinology. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 2162-688X. ; 5:4, s. 122-126
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Blood pressure targets in patients with type 2 diabetes are currently being debated. This review summarizes the current treatment recommendations provided in American and European guidelines, and findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses published during the last decade. We critically assess the basis for the recommendations provided in relation to the evidence presented in reviews. When reviews differ in their results, we discuss the reasons for such differences. The results from recent studies in patients without diabetes and their potential implications for recommendations in patients with diabetes are commented upon. Finally, we conclude what targets are best in line with the totality of the available evidence.
|
|
| 18. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood pressure treatment levels and choice of antihypertensive agent in people with diabetes mellitus : an overview of systematic reviews
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 35, s. 435-462
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Multiple systematic reviews address the effect of antihypertensive treatment in people with diabetes. Here, we summarize current systematic reviews concerning antihypertensive treatment effect at different blood pressure (BP) levels, and relative treatment effect of different antihypertensive agents.METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, BIOSIS, DARE and CDSR during years 2005-2016. Eligibility criteria, number of trials and participants, outcomes analysed, statistical methods used for data synthesis, and principal results were extracted for each review. Review quality was assessed using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews tool.RESULTS: We found four reviews concerning BP treatment level. These consistently showed that the effect of antihypertensive treatment on mortality, cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease was attenuated at lower BP levels. If SBP was more than 140 mmHg, treatment reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular disease, stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure. If SBP was less than 140 mmHg, treatment increased the risk of cardiovascular death. We found eight reviews concerning choice of agent. We found no difference between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers and diuretics in preventing all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, combined cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease and end-stage renal disease. Minor differences exist for stroke and heart failure. Data were limited on people with type 1 diabetes and very elderly patients with type 2 diabetes. None of the reviews concerning choice of agent included all relevant trials.CONCLUSION: The available evidence supports treatment in people with type 2 diabetes and SBP more than 140 mmHg, using any of the major antihypertensive drug classes.
|
|
| 19. |
- Brunström, Mattias, 1988-
(författare)
-
Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels
- 2017
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BackgroundHigh blood pressure is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and premature death. The shape of association between blood pressure and the risk of cardiovascular events is debated. Some researchers suggest that the association is linear or log-linear, whereas others suggest it is J-shaped. Randomized controlled trials of antihypertensive treatment have been successful in hypertension, but ambiguous in the high normal blood pressure range. Previous systematic reviews have not found any interaction between baseline systolic blood pressure and treatment effect, with beneficial effects at systolic blood pressure levels well below what is currently recommended. These reviews, however, use a method to standardize treatment effects and study weights according to within-trial blood pressure differences that may introduce bias.MethodsWe performed two systematic reviews to assess the effect of antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular disease and mortality at different blood pressure levels. The first review was limited to people with diabetes mellitus. The second review included all patient categories except those with heart failure and acute myocardial infarction. Both reviews were designed with guidance from Cochrane Collaborations Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and are reported according to PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials assessing any antihypertensive agent against placebo or any blood pressure targets against each other. Results were combined in random-effects meta-analyses, stratified by baseline systolic blood pressure. Non-stratified analyses were performed for coronary heart disease trials and post-stroke trials. Interaction between blood pressure level and treatment effect was assessed with Cochran’s Q in the first review, and multivariable-adjusted metaregression in the second review.The third paper builds on data from the second paper, and assesses the effect of standardization according to within-trial blood pressure differences on the results of meta-analyses. We performed non-standardized analyses, analyses with standardized treatment effects, and analyses with standardized treatment effects and standard errors. We compared treatment effect measures and heterogeneity across different methods of standardization. We also compared treatment effect estimates between fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analyses within each method of standardization. Lastly, we assessed the association between number of events and study weights, using linear regression.ResultsForty-nine trials assessed the effect of antihypertensive treatment in people with diabetes mellitus. Treatment effect on cardiovascular mortality and myocardial infarction decreased with lower baseline systolic blood pressure. Treatment reduced the risk of death and cardiovascular disease if baseline systolic blood pressure was 140 mm Hg or higher. If baseline systolic blood pressure was below 140 mm Hg, however, treatment increased the risk of cardiovascular death by 15 % (0-32 %).Fifty-one trials assessed the effect of antihypertensive treatment in primary prevention. Treatment effect on cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, and heart failure decreased with lower baseline systolic blood pressure. If baseline systolic blood pressure was 160 mm Hg or higher treatment reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events by 22 % (95 % confidence interval 13-30 %). If systolic blood pressure was 140-159 mm Hg treatment reduced the risk by 12 % (4-20 %), whereas if systolic blood pressure was below 140 mm Hg, treatment effect was neutral (4 % increase to 10 % reduction). All-cause mortality was reduced if systolic blood pressure was 140 mm Hg or higher, with neutral effect at lower levels.Twelve trials compared antihypertensive treatment against placebo in people with coronary heart disease. Mean baseline systolic blood pressure was 138 mm Hg. Treatment reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events by 10 % (3-16 %), whereas the effect on mortality was neutral (7 % increase to 11 % reduction).Standardization of treatment effects resulted in more extreme effect estimates for individual trials. This caused increased between-study heterogeneity, and different results with fixed- and random-effects model. Standardization of standard errors shifted weights from trials with many events to trials with large blood pressure differences. This caused biased overall effect estimates. Standardization of standard errors also resulted in wider confidence intervals, masking the previously increased heterogeneity. This reduced the possibility to find different treatment effects at different blood pressure levels.Conclusion The effect of antihypertensive treatment depends on blood pressure level before treatment. Treatment reduces the risk of death and cardiovascular disease if baseline systolic blood pressure is 140 mm Hg or higher. Below this level, treatment is potentially harmful in people with diabetes, has neutral effect in primary prevention, but might offer additional protection in people with coronary heart disease. Standardization should generally be avoided in meta-analyses of antihypertensive treatment. Previous meta-analyses using standardized methods should be interpreted with caution.
|
|
| 20. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels in patients with diabetes mellitus : systematic review and meta-analyses
- 2016
-
Ingår i: The BMJ. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 1756-1833. ; 352
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To assess the effect of antihypertensive treatment on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus, at different blood pressure levels.Design: Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials.Data sources: CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, and BIOSIS were searched using highly sensitive search strategies. When data required according to the protocol were missing but trials were potentially eligible, we contacted researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and authorities.Eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled trials including 100 or more people with diabetes mellitus, treated for 12 months or more, comparing any antihypertensive agent against placebo, two agents against one, or different blood pressure targets.Results: 49 trials, including 73 738 participants, were included in the meta-analyses. Most of the participants had type 2 diabetes. If baseline systolic blood pressure was greater than 150 mm Hg, antihypertensive treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.99), cardiovascular mortality (0.75, 0.57 to 0.99), myocardial infarction (0.74, 0.63 to 0.87), stroke (0.77, 0.65 to 0.91), and end stage renal disease (0.82, 0.71 to 0.94). If baseline systolic blood pressure was 140-150 mm Hg, additional treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (0.87, 0.78 to 0.98), myocardial infarction (0.84, 0.76 to 0.93), and heart failure (0.80, 0.66 to 0.97). If baseline systolic blood pressure was less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment increased the risk of cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.00 to 1.32), with a tendency towards an increased risk of all cause mortality (1.05, 0.95 to 1.16). Metaregression analyses showed a worse treatment effect with lower baseline systolic blood pressures for cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.03 to 1.29 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure) and myocardial infarction (1.12, 1.03 to 1.22 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure). Patterns were similar for attained systolic blood pressure.Conclusions: Antihypertensive treatment reduces the risk of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus and a systolic blood pressure more than 140 mm Hg. If systolic blood pressure is less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death, with no observed benefit.
|
|
| 21. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of antihypertensive treatment in isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) : systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Blood Pressure. - : Taylor & Francis Group. - 0803-7051 .- 1651-1999. ; 32:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) in middle-aged and elderly is associated with high cardiovascular risk, but no randomised controlled trial has assessed the effect of antihypertensive treatment in ISH using today's definition, i.e. systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) <90 mmHg.METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was performed. Studies with ≥1000 patient-years of follow-up, comparing more intensive versus less intensive BP targets, or active drug versus placebo, were included if the mean baseline SBP was ≥140 mmHg and the mean baseline DBP was <90 mmHg. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Relative risks from each trial were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses, stratified by baseline and attained SBP level.RESULTS: Twenty-four trials, including 113,105 participants (mean age 67 years; mean blood pressure 149/83 mmHg) were included in the analysis. Overall, treatment reduced the risk of MACE by 9% (relative risk 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.93). Treatment was more effective if baseline SBP was ≥160 mmHg (RR 0.77, 95% CIs 0.70-0.86) compared to 140-159 mmHg (RR 0.92, 95% CIs 0.89-0.95; p = 0.002 for interaction), but provided equal additional benefit across all attained SBP levels (RR 0.80, 95% CIs 0.70-0.92 for <130 mmHg, RR 0.92, 95% CIs 0.89-0.96 for 130-139 mmHg, and RR 0.87, 95% CIs 0.82-0.93 for ≥140 mmHg; p = 0.070 for interaction).CONCLUSIONS: These findings support antihypertensive treatment of isolated systolic hypertension, regardless of baseline SBP, to target SBP <140 mmHg and even <130 mmHg if well tolerated.
|
|
| 22. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
From efficacy in trials to effectiveness in clinical practice : The Swedish Stroke Prevention Study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Blood Pressure. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0803-7051 .- 1651-1999. ; 25:4, s. 206-211
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Blood pressure treatment has shown great efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events in randomized controlled trials. If this is effective in reducing cardiovascular disease in the general population, is less studied. Between 2001 and 2009 we performed an intervention to improve blood pressure control in the county of Vasterbotten, using Sodermanland County as a control. The intervention was directed towards primary care physicians and included lectures on blood pressure treatment, a computerized decision support system with treatment recommendations, and yearly feed back on hypertension control. Each county had approximately 255000 inhabitants. Differences in age and incidence of cardiovascular disease were small. During follow-up, more than 400000 patients had their blood pressure recorded. The mean number of measurements was eight per patient, yielding a total of 3.4 million blood pressure recordings. The effect of the intervention will be estimated combining the blood pressure data collected from the electronic medical records, with data on stroke, myocardial infarction and mortality from Swedish health registers. Additional variables, from health registers and Statistics Sweden, will be collected to address for confounders. The blood pressure data collected within this study will be an important asset for future epidemiological studies within the field of hypertension.
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Methodological Aspects of Meta-Analyses Assessing the Effect of Blood Pressure-Lowering Treatment on Clinical Outcomes
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 0194-911X .- 1524-4563. ; 79:3, s. 491-504
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are often considered the highest level of evidence, with high impact on clinical practice guidelines. The methodological literature on systematic reviews and meta-analyses is extensive and covers most aspects relevant to the design and interpretation of meta-analysis findings in general. Analyzing the effect of blood pressure-lowering on clinical outcomes poses several challenges over and above what is covered in the general literature, including how to combine placebo-controlled trials, target-trials, and comparative studies depending on the research question, how to handle the potential interaction between baseline blood pressure level, common comorbidities, and the estimated treatment effect, and how to consider different magnitudes of blood pressure reduction across trials. This review aims to address the most important methodological considerations, to guide the general reader of systematic reviews and meta-analyses within our field, and to help inform the design of future studies. Furthermore, we highlight issues where published meta-analyses have applied different analytical strategies and discuss pros and cons with different strategies.
|
|
