| 1. |
- Alcala, Karine, et al.
(författare)
-
The relationship between blood pressure and risk of renal cell carcinoma
- 2022
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1464-3685 .- 0300-5771. ; 51:4, s. 1317-1327
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The relation between blood pressure and kidney cancer risk is well established but complex and different study designs have reported discrepant findings on the relative importance of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and systolic blood pressure (SBP). In this study, we sought to describe the temporal relation between diastolic and SBP with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) risk in detail.METHODS: Our study involved two prospective cohorts: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study and UK Biobank, including >700 000 participants and 1692 incident RCC cases. Risk analyses were conducted using flexible parametric survival models for DBP and SBP both separately as well as with mutuality adjustment and then adjustment for extended risk factors. We also carried out univariable and multivariable Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses (DBP: ninstruments = 251, SBP: ninstruments = 213) to complement the analyses of measured DBP and SBP.RESULTS: In the univariable analysis, we observed clear positive associations with RCC risk for both diastolic and SBP when measured ≥5 years before diagnosis and suggestive evidence for a stronger risk association in the year leading up to diagnosis. In mutually adjusted analysis, the long-term risk association of DBP remained, with a hazard ratio (HR) per standard deviation increment 10 years before diagnosis (HR10y) of 1.20 (95% CI: 1.10-1.30), whereas the association of SBP was attenuated (HR10y: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.91-1.10). In the complementary multivariable MR analysis, we observed an odds ratio for a 1-SD increment (ORsd) of 1.34 (95% CI: 1.08-1.67) for genetically predicted DBP and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.56-0.88) for genetically predicted SBP.CONCLUSION: The results of this observational and MR study are consistent with an important role of DBP in RCC aetiology. The relation between SBP and RCC risk was less clear but does not appear to be independent of DBP.
|
|
| 2. |
- 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)
|
|
| 3. |
- Bergström, Göran, et al.
(författare)
-
Self-report tool for identification of individuals with coronary atherosclerosis : the Swedish cardiopulmonary bioimage study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2047-9980. ; 13:14
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Coronary atherosclerosis detected by imaging is a marker of elevated cardiovascular risk. However, imaging involves large resources and exposure to radiation. The aim was, therefore, to test whether nonimaging data, specifically data that can be self-reported, could be used to identify individuals with moderate to severe coronary atherosclerosis.METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from the population-based SCAPIS (Swedish CardioPulmonary BioImage Study) in individuals with coronary computed tomography angiography (n=25 182) and coronary artery calcification score (n=28 701), aged 50 to 64 years without previous ischemic heart disease. We developed a risk prediction tool using variables that could be assessed from home (self-report tool). For comparison, we also developed a tool using variables from laboratory tests, physical examinations, and self-report (clinical tool) and evaluated both models using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, external validation, and benchmarked against factors in the pooled cohort equation. The self-report tool (n=14 variables) and the clinical tool (n=23 variables) showed high-to-excellent discriminative ability to identify a segment involvement score ≥4 (area under the curve 0.79 and 0.80, respectively) and significantly better than the pooled cohort equation (area under the curve 0.76, P<0.001). The tools showed a larger net benefit in clinical decision-making at relevant threshold probabilities. The self-report tool identified 65% of all individuals with a segment involvement score ≥4 in the top 30% of the highest-risk individuals. Tools developed for coronary artery calcification score ≥100 performed similarly.CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a self-report tool that effectively identifies individuals with moderate to severe coronary atherosclerosis. The self-report tool may serve as prescreening tool toward a cost-effective computed tomography-based screening program for high-risk individuals.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bergström, Göran, et al.
(författare)
-
Self-Report Tool for Identification of Individuals With Coronary Atherosclerosis : The Swedish CardioPulmonary BioImage Study
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - 2047-9980. ; , s. 1-13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Coronary atherosclerosis detected by imaging is a marker of elevated cardiovascular risk. However, imaging involves large resources and exposure to radiation. The aim was, therefore, to test whether nonimaging data, specifically data that can be self-reported, could be used to identify individuals with moderate to severe coronary atherosclerosis.METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from the population-based SCAPIS (Swedish CardioPulmonary BioImage Study) in individuals with coronary computed tomography angiography (n=25 182) and coronary artery calcification score (n=28 701), aged 50 to 64 years without previous ischemic heart disease. We developed a risk prediction tool using variables that could be assessed from home (self-report tool). For comparison, we also developed a tool using variables from laboratory tests, physical examinations, and self-report (clinical tool) and evaluated both models using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, external validation, and benchmarked against factors in the pooled cohort equation. The self-report tool (n=14 variables) and the clinical tool (n=23 variables) showed high-to-excellent discriminative ability to identify a segment involvement score ≥4 (area under the curve 0.79 and 0.80, respectively) and significantly better than the pooled cohort equation (area under the curve 0.76, P<0.001). The tools showed a larger net benefit in clinical decision-making at relevant threshold probabilities. The self-report tool identified 65% of all individuals with a segment involvement score ≥4 in the top 30% of the highest-risk individuals. Tools developed for coronary artery calcification score ≥100 performed similarly. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a self-report tool that effectively identifies individuals with moderate to severe coronary atherosclerosis. The self-report tool may serve as prescreening tool toward a cost-effective computed tomography-based screening program for high-risk individuals.
|
|
| 5. |
- 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.
|
|
| 6. |
- 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.
|
|
| 7. |
- 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.
|
|
| 8. |
- 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.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- 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.
|
|
| 12. |
- 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.
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Critical appraisal trumps timing of antihypertensive medications : [Studie avfärdar fördelar med blodtryckssänkande till natten]
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Läkartidningen. - : Läkartidningen Förlag AB. - 0023-7205 .- 1652-7518. ; 119
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treatment In Morning versus Evening (TIME) was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial, including more than 21 000 people with medically treated hypertension. Participants were randomized to morning or evening intake of their antihypertensive medications and followed for an average of 5.2 years. Results were completely neutral, as opposed to the heavily criticized Hygia trial published in 2019. These findings are of clinical importance because they show that it does not matter if patients take their antihypertensive medications in the morning or evening. They are also of general scientific interest because they highlight the importance of post publication peer review and the need for replication of surprising scientific findings.
|
|
| 15. |
- 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.
|
|
| 16. |
- 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.
|
|
| 17. |
- 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.
|
|
| 18. |
- 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.
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- 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.
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
SCORE2 – ett uppdaterat verktyg för att skatta kardiovaskulär risk : [SCORE2 - an updated model for cardiovascular risk prediction]
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Läkartidningen. - 0023-7205 .- 1652-7518. ; 118
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cardiovascular disease is the most important cause of death and life-years lost in Sweden today. Cardiovascular risk prediction is a cornerstone in primary prevention; the use of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy is guided by absolute cardiovascular risk. The Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) model has been the most widely applied model in Sweden for almost two decades. Recently, an updated model called SCORE2 was published. The new risk prediction model is based on contemporary data, predicts the risk of incident cardiovascular disease in addition to cardiovascular mortality, and accounts for competing risks, thus overcoming some major limitations with SCORE. Sweden is classified as a moderate-risk country according to the new model; here we report the risk chart for moderate-risk countries translated into Swedish.
|
|
| 30. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
SPRINT in context : meta-analysis of trials with baseline normotension and low levels of previous cardiovascular disease
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 36:5, s. 979-986
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To estimate the effect of antihypertensive treatment in trials with baseline normotension and low levels of previous cardiovascular disease. To test if the results from SPRINT are compatible with those from other trials, and test the impact of SPRINT results on overall effect estimates. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with at least 1000 patient-years of follow-up, comparing antihypertensive treatment versus placebo, or different blood pressure goals against each other. Trials with at least 50% previous cardiovascular disease were excluded. Results: Sixteen trials, including 66816 participants, were included in the meta-analyses. Mean baseline SBP was 138mmHg, and mean difference between treatment arms was 5.5mmHg. Antihypertensive treatment was associated with a neutral effect on all-cause mortality [relative risk 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.05] and major cardiovascular events (0.97, 0.91-1.03). Results from SPRINT differed significantly from those of other trials (P=0.012 for all-cause mortality; P=0.016 for major cardiovascular events), but overall effect estimates were similar when SPRINT was excluded (1.01, 0.95-1.06 for all-cause mortality; 0.98, 0.93-1.03 for major cardiovascular events). Treatment was associated with reduced risk of secondary outcomes stroke (0.84, 0.71-1.00) and heart failure (0.88, 0.78-0.98), although heterogeneity was high in the stroke analysis (I-2=54%). Conclusion: SPRINT results are not representative for trials with baseline normotension and low levels of previous cardiovascular disease. Antihypertensive treatment does not protect against death or major cardiovascular events in this setting.
|
|
| 31. |
- Brunström, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
Standardization according to blood pressure lowering in meta-analyses of antihypertensive trials : comparison of three methodological approaches
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 36:1, s. 4-15
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Assess how standardization of relative risks (RRs) and standard errors (SEs), according to blood pressure differences within trials, affects heterogeneity, overall effect estimates and study weights in meta-analyses of antihypertensive treatment.METHOD: Data from a previous systematic review were used. Three sets of analyses were performed, using both random-effects and fixed-effects model for meta-analyses. First, we used raw data from the included trials. Second, we standardized RRs as if SBP was reduced by 10 mmHg in all trials. Third, we standardized both RRs and SEs.RESULTS: When RRs were standardized according to blood pressure lowering, heterogeneity between trials increased (I = 36 vs. 93% for mortality). This conferred large differences in treatment effect estimates using random-effects and fixed-effects model (RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.89, respectively, 0.97, 0.94-0.99). When SEs were standardized, confidence intervals for individual trials widened, resulting in lower power to detect heterogeneity across trials. Study weights were dissociated from number of events in trials (P < 0.0001, R = 0.99 before standardization vs. P = 0.063, R = 0.05 after standardization). This induced a secondary shift in weight from trials with lower baseline SBP to trials with higher baseline SBP, resulting in exaggerated overall effect estimates.CONCLUSION: Standardization of RRs exaggerates differences between trials and makes meta-analyses highly sensitive to choice of statistical method. Standardization of SEs masks heterogeneity and results in biased effect estimates.
|
|
| 32. |
- Charchar, Fadi J., et al.
(författare)
-
Lifestyle management of hypertension : International Society of Hypertension position paper endorsed by the World Hypertension League and European Society of Hypertension
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 42:1, s. 23-49
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Hypertension, defined as persistently elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) >140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at least 90 mmHg (International Society of Hypertension guidelines), affects over 1.5 billion people worldwide. Hypertension is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events (e.g. coronary heart disease, heart failure and stroke) and death. An international panel of experts convened by the International Society of Hypertension College of Experts compiled lifestyle management recommendations as first-line strategy to prevent and control hypertension in adulthood. We also recommend that lifestyle changes be continued even when blood pressure-lowering medications are prescribed. Specific recommendations based on literature evidence are summarized with advice to start these measures early in life, including maintaining a healthy body weight, increased levels of different types of physical activity, healthy eating and drinking, avoidance and cessation of smoking and alcohol use, management of stress and sleep levels. We also discuss the relevance of specific approaches including consumption of sodium, potassium, sugar, fibre, coffee, tea, intermittent fasting as well as integrated strategies to implement these recommendations using, for example, behaviour change-related technologies and digital tools.
|
|
| 33. |
- Eklund, Sanna, et al.
(författare)
-
10-year mortality, causes of death and cardiovascular comorbidities in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurology. - : Springer Nature. - 0340-5354 .- 1432-1459. ; 271, s. 1311-1319
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The objective was to investigate 10-year mortality, causes of death and cardiovascular comorbidity in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) and to evaluate their mutual associations.Methods: This prospective cohort study included 176 CSF-shunted iNPH patients, and 368 age- and sex-matched controls. At inclusion, participants were medically examined, had blood analyzed and answered a questionnaire. The vascular comorbidities investigated were smoking, diabetes, body mass index, blood pressure (BP), hyperlipidemia, kidney function, atrial fibrillation and, cerebro- and cardiovascular disease.Results: Survival was observed for a mean period of 10.3 ± 0.84 years. Shunted iNPH patients had an increased risk of death compared to controls (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.5, 95% CI 1.86–3.36; p < 0.001). After 10 years, 50% (n = 88) of iNPH patients and 24% (n = 88) of the controls were dead (p < 0.001). The risk of dying from cardiovascular disease, falls and neurological diseases were higher in iNPH (p < 0.05). The most common cause of death in iNPH was cardiovascular diseases (14% vs 7% for controls). Seven out of nine iNPH dying from falls had subdural hematomas. Systolic BP (HR = 0.985 95% CI 0.972–0.997, p = 0.018), atrial fibrillation (HR = 2.652, 95% CI 1.506–4.872, p < 0.001) and creatinine (HR = 1.018, 95% CI 1.010–1.027, p < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality for iNPH.Discussion: This long-term and population-matched cohort study indicates that in spite of CSF-shunt treatment, iNPH has shorter life expectancy. It may be important to treat iNPH in supplementary ways to reduce mortality. Both cardiovascular comorbidities and lethal falls are contributing to the excess mortality in iNPH and reducing these preventable risks should be an established part of the treatment plan.
|
|
| 34. |
- Hageman, S., et al.
(författare)
-
SCORE2 risk prediction algorithms: new models to estimate 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Europe
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 42:25, s. 2439-2454
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims The aim of this study was to develop, validate, and illustrate an updated prediction model (SCORE2) to estimate 10-year fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in individuals without previous CVD or diabetes aged 40-69 years in Europe. Methods and results We derived risk prediction models using individual-participant data from 45 cohorts in 13 countries (677 684 individuals, 30 121 CVD events). We used sex-specific and competing risk-adjusted models, including age, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, and total- and HDL-cholesterol. We defined four risk regions in Europe according to country-specific CVD mortality, recalibrating models to each region using expected incidences and risk factor distributions. Region-specific incidence was estimated using CVD mortality and incidence data on 10 776 466 individuals. For external validation, we analysed data from 25 additional cohorts in 15 European countries (1 133 181 individuals, 43 492 CVD events). After applying the derived risk prediction models to external validation cohorts, C-indices ranged from 0.67 (0.65-0.68) to 0.81 (0.76-0.86). Predicted CVD risk varied several-fold across European regions. For example, the estimated 10-year CVD risk for a 50-year-old smoker, with a systolic blood pressure of 140 mmHg, total cholesterol of 5.5 mmol/L, and HDL-cholesterol of 1.3 mmol/L, ranged from 5.9% for men in low- risk countries to 14.0% for men in very high-risk countries, and from 4.2% for women in low-risk countries to 13.7% for women in very high-risk countries. Conclusion SCORE2-a new algorithm derived, calibrated, and validated to predict 10-year risk of first-onset CVD in European populations-enhances the identification of individuals at higher risk of developing CVD across Europe.
|
|
| 35. |
- Håkansson, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Prevalence and treatment of diabetes and pre-diabetes in a real-world heart failure population : a single-centre cross-sectional study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Open heart. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2053-3624. ; 9:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate a real-world heart failure (HF) cohort regarding (1) prevalence of known diabetes mellitus (DM), undiagnosed DM and pre-diabetes, (2) if hf treatment differs depending on glycaemic status and (3) if treatment of DM differs depending on HF phenotype.Methods: All patients who had received a diagnosis of HF at Umeå University Hospital between 2010 and 2019 were identified and data were extracted from patient files according to a prespecified protocol containing parameters for clinical characteristics, including echocardiogram results, comorbidities, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values. Patients’ HF phenotype was determined using the latest available echocardiogram. The number of patients with previous DM diagnosis was assessed. Patients without a previous diagnosis of DM were classified as non-DM, pre-diabetes or probable DM according to FPG and HbA1c levels using WHO criteria.Results: In total, 2326 patients (59% male, mean age 76±13 years) with HF and at least one echocardiogram were assessed. Of these, 617 (27%) patients had a previous diagnosis of DM. Of the 1709 patients without a previous diagnosis of DM, 1092 (67%) patients had either an FPG or HbA1c recorded, of which 441 (41%) met criteria for pre-diabetes and 97 (9%) met criteria for probable diabetes, corresponding to 19% and 4% of the entire cohort, respectively. Patients with HF and diabetes were more often treated with diuretics and beta blockers compared with non-DM patients (64% vs 42%, p<0.001 and 88% vs 83%, p<0.001, respectively). There was no difference in DM treatment between HF phenotypes.Conclusions: DM and pre-diabetes are common in this HF population with 50% of patients having either known DM, probable DM or pre-diabetes. Patients with HF and DM are more often treated with common HF medications. HF phenotype did not affect choice of DM therapy.
|
|
| 36. |
- Johansson, Cecilia, et al.
(författare)
-
Diabetes, prediabetes, and atrial fibrillation : a population-based cohort study based on national and regional registers
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Internal Medicine. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0954-6820 .- 1365-2796. ; 294:5, s. 605-615
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Previous studies have shown an increased risk for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter (AF) in people with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes. It is unclear whether this increase in AF risk is independent of other risk factors for AF.Objective: To investigate the association between diabetes and different prediabetic states, as independent risk factors for the onset of AF.Methods: We performed a population-based cohort study in Northern Sweden, including data on fasting plasma glucose, oral glucose tolerance test, major cardiovascular risk factors, medical history, and lifestyle factors. Participants were divided into six groups depending on glycemic status and followed through national registers for AF diagnosis. Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the association between glycemic status and AF, using normoglycemia as reference.Results: The cohort consisted of 88,889 participants who underwent a total of 139,661 health examinations. In the model adjusted for age and sex, there was a significant association between glycemic status and development of AF in all groups except the impaired glucose tolerance group, with the strongest association for the group with known diabetes (p-value <0.001). In a model adjusted for sex, age, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, antihypertensive drugs, cholesterol, alcohol, smoking, education level, marital status, and physical activity, there was no significant association between glycemic status and AF.Conclusions/interpretation: The association between glycemic status and AF disappears upon adjustment for potential confounders. Diabetes and prediabetes do not appear to be independent risk factors for AF.
|
|
| 37. |
|
|
| 38. |
- Jussil, Heidi, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different antihypertensive drug classes for cardiovascular disease prevention: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 11:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Clinical practice guidelines differ in their recommendations on first-line antihypertensive drug classes. No adequately powered randomised controlled trial have assessed all major drug classes against each other, and previous meta-analyses have mainly relied on pairwise meta-analyses for treatment comparisons.Methods and analysis A systematic review and network meta-analysis will be carried out to assess the efficacy and acceptability of all major antihypertensive drug classes. PubMed and CENTRAL were searched on 21 February 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials with at least 1000 person-years of follow-up, assessing any antihypertensive agent against other agents or placebo. All trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be assessed for risk of bias using the second version of Cochrane's risk of bias assessment tool. The study selection process, risk of bias assessment and data extraction are done by two authors in duplicate. Relative risks from individual trials will be combined in pairwise meta-analyses; in the absence of important intransitivity, random-effects network meta-analysis will be performed. The primary outcome for efficacy will be major adverse cardiovascular events, whereas the primary acceptability outcome will be treatment discontinuation for any reason. Additional outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and acute renal failure. The impact of differences within drug classes will be explored through alternative networks, including analysing thiazide-like and thiazide-type diuretics separately.Ethics and dissemination This review will only process aggregated study level data and does not require ethical approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020205482.
|
|
| 39. |
|
|
| 40. |
|
|
| 41. |
- Kreutz, Reinhold, et al.
(författare)
-
Beta-blocker bashing and downgrading in hypertension management : A fashionable trend representing a matter of concern
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 42:6, s. 966-967
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In their commentary, Shantsila et al.[1] while discussing some relevant issues of the 2023 Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) [2], for example, the length of the text and the involvement of only a few primary care physicians, they largely focus on the discussion on beta-blockers. The authors conclude that ‘the 2023 ESH Guidelines still argue in favour of beta-blockers that their clinical inferiority was simply to lesser blood pressure (BP) reduction rather than class effect’. However, this is an oversimplification that does not reflect the numerous arguments and facts that support the overall rationale of the 2023 ESH Guidelines for the recommended use of beta-blockers in the management of hypertension [2]. Taken together with other similar comments [3], it appears that it has become fashionable to down-grade beta-blockers and to dismiss the points already put forward in the 2023 ESH guidelines [2] and in previous publications revisiting beta-blocker benefits in detail [4,5]. Against this background, we use this opportunity to emphasize on key aspects of the beta-blocker discussion in brief. For a more comprehensive review of the literature, we refer to a very recent publication by us regarding the role of beta-blocker in hypertension [6].
|
|
| 42. |
- Kreutz, Reinhold, et al.
(författare)
-
Do recent meta-analyses truly prove that treatment with blood pressure-lowering drugs is beneficial at any blood pressure value, no matter how low? : A critical review
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 40:5, s. 839-846
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Current European guidelines for the management of hypertension and on cardiovascular disease prevention place the threshold for pharmacological treatment at a SBP level of 140 mmHg or above, with the exception of patients at very high risk (mainly because of coronary heart disease). This is in agreement with the current definition of hypertension, that is, the level of blood pressure at which the benefits of treatment outweigh the risks of treatment, as documented by clinical trials. This rationale and definition was recently challenged by meta-analyses using individual participant-level data from 48 randomized trials by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC). The authors calculated for a fixed 5 mmHg pharmacological reduction of SBP an overall 10% risk reduction for major cardiovascular events. It was concluded that there was no reliable evidence of heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline SBP categories; that the effect was independent from the presence of cardiovascular disease; applied also to old and very old individuals up to 84 years or beyond; and that BP-lowering was also beneficial in individuals with normal or high-normal SBP down to a baseline SBP less than 120 mmHg. In this report, we identify and discuss a number of shortcomings of the BPLTTC meta-analyses. In our view, the conclusions by the BPLTTC must be -together with accompanying suggestions to abandon the definition of hypertension - strongly rejected as they are not justified and may be harmful for cardiovascular health in individuals without hypertension.
|
|
| 43. |
|
|
| 44. |
- Kruger, Ruan, et al.
(författare)
-
Highlights from the International Society of Hypertension's new investigators network during 2019
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Hypertension. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0263-6352 .- 1473-5598. ; 38:5, s. 968-973
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The New Investigators Committee (NIC) of the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) is a dynamic group of junior doctors and scientists, actively involved in various society activities. This report highlights the events (scientific meetings and summer schools) and activities (social media, mentorship and networking) during 2019 including May Measurement Month and collaborative efforts with the ISH Women in Hypertension Research Committee (WiHRC). The ISH NIC is proud to sponsor awards for outstanding work by junior and emerging researchers at hypertension conferences and also provides opportunities to showcase their work on our social media features such as 'Our Fellows Work' and the New Investigator Spotlight of the month. In 2020, the ISH NIC aims to promote women in leadership roles and to foster strong collaborations with and between society committees and other scientific organizations.
|
|
| 45. |
- Lind, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Obesity is associated with coronary artery stenosis independently of metabolic risk factors : the population-based SCAPIS study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Atherosclerosis. - : Elsevier. - 0021-9150 .- 1879-1484. ; 362, s. 1-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and aims: Previous studies reported divergent results on whether metabolically healthy obesity is associated with increased coronary artery calcium and carotid plaques. We investigated this in a cross-sectional fashion in a large, well-defined, middle-aged population using coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and carotid ultrasound. Methods: In the SCAPIS study (50–65 years, 51% female), CCTA and carotid artery ultrasound were performed in 23,674 individuals without clinical atherosclerotic disease. These subjects were divided into six groups according to BMI (normal weight, overweight, obese) and the presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) according to the NCEP consensus criteria. Results: The severity of coronary artery stenosis was increased in individuals with obesity without MetS compared to normal-weight individuals without MetS (OR 1.47, 95%CI 1.34–1.62; p < 0.0001), even after adjusting for non-HDL-cholesterol and several lifestyle factors. Such difference was not observed for the presence of carotid artery plaques (OR 0.94, 95%CI 0.87–1.02; p = 0.11). Obese or overweight individuals without any MetS criteria (except the waist criterion) showed significantly more pronounced stenosis in the coronary arteries as compared to the normal-weight individuals, while one criterion was needed to show increased plaque prevalence in the carotid arteries. High blood pressure was the most important single criterion for increased atherosclerosis in this respect. Conclusions: Individuals with obesity without MetS showed increased severity of coronary artery stenosis, but no increased occurrence of carotid artery plaques compared to normal-weight individuals without MetS, further emphasizing that obesity is not a benign condition even in the absence of MetS.
|
|
| 46. |
|
|
| 47. |
- Mancia, Giuseppe, et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale for the inclusion of β-blockers among major antihypertensive drugs in the 2023 European society of hypertension guidelines
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0194-911X .- 1524-4563. ; 81:5, s. 1021-1030
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- We address the reasons why, unlike other guidelines, in the 2023 guidelines of the European Society of Hypertension β-blockers (BBs) have been regarded as major drugs for the treatment of hypertension, at the same level as diuretics, calcium channel blockers, and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. We argue that BBs, (1) reduce blood pressure (the main factor responsible for treatment-related protection) not less than other drugs, (2) reduce pooled cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in placebo-controlled trials, in which there has also been a sizeable reduction of all major cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes, (3) have been associated with a lower global cardiovascular protection in 2 but not in several other comparison trials, in which the protective effect of BBs versus the other major drugs has been similar or even greater, with a slightly smaller or no difference of global benefit in large trial meta-analyses and a similar protective effect when comparisons extend to BBs in combination versus other drug combinations. We mention the large number of cardiac and other comorbidities for which BBs are elective drugs, and we express criticism against the exclusion of BBs because of their lower protective effect against stroke in comparison trials, because, for still uncertain reasons, differences in protection against cause-specific events (stroke, heart failure, and coronary disease) have been reported for other major drugs. These partial data cannot replace global benefits as the main deciding factor for drug choice, also because in the general hypertensive population whether and which type of event might occur is unknown.
|
|
| 48. |
|
|
| 49. |
- Rietz, Helene, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood pressure level in late adolescence and risk for cardiovascular events : a cohort study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of Internal Medicine. - : American College of Physicians. - 0003-4819 .- 1539-3704. ; 176:10, s. 1289-1298
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Not enough is known about the association between blood pressure (BP) in adolescence and future cardiovascular events.OBJECTIVE: To measure this association using the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for classifying BP elevation.DESIGN: Cohort study.Sweden.PARTICIPANTS: Males in late adolescence who were conscripted into the military from 1969 to 1997.MEASUREMENTS: Baseline BP was measured at conscription. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for myocardial infarction, heart failure, ischemic stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage.RESULTS: The study included 1 366 519 males with a mean age of 18.3 years. The baseline BP was classified as elevated (120 to 129/<80 mm Hg) for 28.8% of participants and hypertensive (≥130/80 mm Hg) for 53.7%. During a median follow-up of 35.9 years, 79 644 had a primary outcome. The adjusted hazard ratio was 1.10 for elevated BP (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.13), 1.15 for stage 1 isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) (CI, 1.11 to 1.18), 1.23 for stage 1 isolated diastolic hypertension (IDH) (CI, 1.18 to 1.28), 1.32 for stage 1 systolic-diastolic hypertension (SDH) (CI, 1.27 to 1.37), 1.31 for stage 2 ISH (CI, 1.28 to 1.35), 1.55 for stage 2 IDH (CI, 1.42 to 1.69), and 1.71 for stage 2 SDH (CI, 1.58 to 1.84). The cumulative risk for cardiovascular events also increased gradually across BP stages, ranging from 14.7% for normal BP to 24.3% for stage 2 SDH at age 68 years.LIMITATION: This was an observational study of Swedish men.CONCLUSION: Increasing BP levels in late adolescence are associated with gradually increasing risks for major cardiovascular events, beginning at a BP level of 120/80 mm Hg.
|
|
| 50. |
- Rietz, Helene, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood Pressure Level in Late Adolescence and Risk for Cardiovascular Events
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of Internal Medicine. - : American College of Physicians. - 0003-4819 .- 1539-3704. ; 176:10, s. 1289-1298
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Not enough is known about the association between blood pressure (BP) in adolescence and future cardiovascular events.Objective: To measure this association using the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for classifying BP elevation.Design: Cohort study.Setting: Sweden.Participants: Males in late adolescence who were conscripted into the military from 1969 to 1997.Measurements: Baseline BP was measured at conscription. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for myocardial infarction, heart failure, ischemic stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage.Results: The study included 1 366 519 males with a mean age of 18.3 years. The baseline BP was classified as elevated (120 to 129/<80 mm Hg) for 28.8% of participants and hypertensive (>= 130/80 mm Hg) for 53.7%. During a median follow-up of 35.9 years, 79 644 had a primary outcome. The adjusted hazard ratio was 1.10 for elevated BP (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.13), 1.15 for stage 1 isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) (CI, 1.11 to 1.18), 1.23 for stage 1 isolated diastolic hypertension (IDH) (CI, 1.18 to 1.28), 1.32 for stage 1 systolic-diastolic hypertension (SDH) (CI, 1.27 to 1.37), 1.31 for stage 2 ISH (CI, 1.28 to 1.35), 1.55 for stage 2 IDH (CI, 1.42 to 1.69), and 1.71 for stage 2 SDH (CI, 1.58 to 1.84). The cumulative risk for cardiovascular events also increased gradually across BP stages, ranging from 14.7% for normal BP to 24.3% for stage 2 SDH at age 68 years.Limitation: This was an observational study of Swedish men.Conclusion: Increasing BP levels in late adolescence are associated with gradually increasing risks for major cardiovascular events, beginning at a BP level of 120/80 mm Hg.
|
|
