Serious adverse events in patients with target-oriented blood pressure management: a systematic review

Blood pressure and variability responses to the down-titration of antihypertensive drugs

OBJECTIVES

Several recent guidelines have proposed the gradual reduction of antihypertensive drugs for patients with well controlled blood pressure (BP). However, no studies have examined alterations in BP variability (BPV) during the down-titration of antihypertensives. This study aims to investigate changes in home BPV during the down-titration of antihypertensives.

METHODS

We analyzed 83 hypertensive patients who underwent down-titration of antihypertensives and had available home BP data during the down-titration. Down-titration was performed when home SBP was less than 120 mmHg, regardless of the clinic SBP. Primary exposure variable was the standard deviation (SD) of home BP.

RESULTS

Among 83 patients (mean age 66.3 ± 11.9 years; 45.8% men), down-titration led to increase home SBP (from 110.5 to 118.7 mmHg; P  < 0.001), and home DBP (from 68.8 to 72.8 mmHg; P  = 0.001) significantly. There were no significant differences in SDs of SBP [from 6.02 ± 3.79 to 5.76 ± 3.09 in morning, P  = 0.570; from 6.13 ± 3.32 to 6.63 ± 3.70 in evening, P  = 0.077; and from 6.54 (4.80, 8.31) to 6.37 (4.65, 8.76) in home SBP, P  = 0.464] and SDs of DBP during the down-titration of antihypertensive drugs.

CONCLUSION

Down-titration of antihypertensive drugs did not have notable impact on clinic BP and home BPV, while significantly increasing home BP. These findings provide important insights indicating that the potential concern related to an increase in BPV in the planned strategy of reducing antihypertensive drugs is not substantial.

The efficacy of Zingiber officinale on dyslipidaemia, blood pressure, and inflammation as cardiovascular risk factors: A systematic review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and chronic inflammation contribute to the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Zingiber officinale has been suggested to reduce these CVD risk factors; however, the clinical evidence remains unclear. This systematic review aims to analyse the effect of Z. officinale as a sole intervention on these risk factors.

METHODS

In this PRISMA-based systematic review, we included randomised clinical trials from PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (July 2020) analysing triglycerides, low- and high-density lipoprotein (LDL, HDL), total cholesterol, C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin 1, 6, 10, systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure as outcomes. Quality of studies was evaluated by JADAD and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were included, mostly (79.2%) showing low risk of bias. These were based on obesity and cardio-metabolic derangements (33.3%), type 2 diabetes mellitus (37.5%), and miscellaneous conditions (29.2%). While total cholesterol and triglycerides levels mostly improved after Z. officinale, results were inconsistent for other blood lipids markers. Inflammatory markers (CRP, TNF-α) were more consistently reduced by Z. officinale, while only 3 studies reported a non-significant reduction of blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there remains a paucity of studies, Z. officinale may be beneficial for improving dyslipidaemia and inflammation.

Kidney tubule health, mineral metabolism and adverse events in persons with CKD in SPRINT

BACKGROUND

Measures of kidney tubule health are risk markers for acute kidney injury (AKI) in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) during hypertension treatment, but their associations with other adverse events (AEs) are unknown.

METHODS

Among 2377 Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) participants with CKD, we measured at baseline eight urine biomarkers of kidney tubule health and two serum biomarkers of mineral metabolism pathways that act on the kidney tubules. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate biomarker associations with risk of a composite of pre-specified serious AEs (hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, AKI, bradycardia and injurious falls) and outpatient AEs (hyperkalemia and hypokalemia).

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean age was 73 ± 9 years and mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 46 ± 11 mL/min/1.73 m2. During a median follow-up of 3.8 years, 716 (30%) participants experienced the composite AE. Higher urine interleukin-18, kidney injury molecule-1, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), lower urine uromodulin (UMOD) and higher serum fibroblast growth factor-23 were individually associated with higher risk of the composite AE outcome in multivariable-adjusted models including eGFR and albuminuria. When modeling biomarkers in combination, higher NGAL [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.08 per 2-fold higher biomarker level, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.13], higher MCP-1 (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19) and lower UMOD (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97) were each associated with higher composite AE risk. Biomarker associations did not vary by intervention arm (P > 0.10 for all interactions).

CONCLUSIONS

Among persons with CKD, several kidney tubule biomarkers are associated with higher risk of AEs during hypertension treatment, independent of eGFR and albuminuria.

Associations of High-Sensitivity Troponin and Natriuretic Peptide Levels With Serious Adverse Events in SPRINT

Background

Assessing the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) during hypertension treatment is important for understanding the benefit‐harm trade‐offs of lower blood pressure goals. It is unknown whether high‐sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs‐cTnT) and N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) provide information about SAEs.

Methods and Results

In SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), hs‐cTnT and NT‐proBNP were measured at baseline in 8828 (94.3%) and 8836 (94.4%) participants, respectively. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate hs‐cTnT and NT‐proBNP associations with a composite of SPRINT’s SAEs of interest: hypotension, syncope, bradycardia, acute kidney injury, electrolyte abnormalities, and injurious falls. Elevations in hs‐cTnT and NT‐proBNP were associated with increased composite SAE risk (hazard ratio [HR] per 2‐fold higher hs‐cTnT: 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06‒1.25; HR per 2‐fold higher NT‐proBNP: 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05‒1.14). Compared with both hs‐cTnT and NT‐proBNP in the lower tertiles, both biomarkers in the highest tertile was associated with increased composite SAE risk (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.32‒1.84). Composite SAE risk was higher in the intensive‐treatment group than in the standard‐treatment group for participants with both biomarkers in the lower tertiles, but similar between treatment groups for participants with both biomarkers in the highest tertile (P for interaction=0.008).

Conclusions

Elevations in hs‐cTnT and NT‐proBNP individually and in combination are associated with higher composite SAE risk in SPRINT. The differential impact of blood pressure treatment on SAE risk across combined biomarker categories may have implications for identifying individuals with more favorable benefit‐harm profiles for intensive blood pressure lowering.

Older Age, Polypharmacy, and Low Systolic Blood Pressure Are Associated With More Hypotension-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Antihypertensives

Background and Aims: Low systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels while being treated with antihypertensives may cause hypotension-related adverse events (hrAEs), especially in the elderly, women, and frail patients. We aimed to assess the association between the occurrence of hrAEs and low SBP levels, age, sex, and polypharmacy among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with antihypertensives.

Methods: In this cohort study, we used the Groningen Initiative to ANalyse Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) database which includes patients managed for T2D in primary care from the north of the Netherlands. Patients treated with ≥1 antihypertensive drug and ≥1 SBP measurement between 2012 and 2014 were included. The outcome was the presence of an hrAE, i.e. postural hypotension, dizziness, weakness/tiredness, and syncope in 90 days before or after the lowest recorded SBP level. Age (≥70 vs. <70 years), sex (women vs. men), polypharmacy (5–9 drugs or ≥10 drugs vs. <5 drugs), and SBP level (<130 or ≥130 mmHg) were included as determinants. Logistic regression analyses were conducted for age, sex and polypharmacy, including the SBP level and their interaction, adjusted for confounders. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are presented.

Results: We included 21,119 patients, 49% of which were ≥70 years old, 52% were women, 57% had polypharmacy, 61% had an SBP level <130 mmHg and 5.4% experienced an hrAE. Patients with an SBP level <130 mmHg had a significantly higher occurrence of hrAEs than patients with a higher SBP level (6.2 vs. 4.0%; ORs 1.41, 95%CI 1.14–1.75, 1.43, 95%CI 1.17–1.76 and 1.33, 95%CI 1.06–1.67 by age, sex, and polypharmacy, respectively). Older patients (OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.02–1.64) and patients with polypharmacy (OR 5–9 drugs 1.27, 95%CI 1.00–1.62; OR ≥10 drugs 2.37, 95% CI 1.67–3.37) were more likely to experience an hrAE. The association with sex and the interactions between the determinants and SBP level were not significant.

Conclusion: Low SBP levels in patients with T2D treated with antihypertensives is associated with an increase in hrAEs. Older patients and those with polypharmacy are particularly at risk of hrAEs. Age, sex, and polypharmacy did not modify the risk of hrAEs associated with a low SBP level.

Heart health meets cognitive health: evidence on the role of blood pressure

The enormous societal and financial burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias requires the identification of risk factors and pathways to reduce dementia risk. Blood pressure (BP) management and control is one promising area, in which data have been inconclusive. Accumulating evidence over the past 5 years shows the effectiveness of BP management interventions among older individuals at risk, most notably from the SPRINT-MIND trial. These findings have been coupled with longitudinal observational data. However, to date, the results do not concur on the optimal timing and target of BP lowering, and further study in diverse populations is needed. Given the long preclinical phase of dementia and data supporting the importance of BP control earlier in the lifecourse, long-term interventional and observational studies in ethnically and racially diverse populations, with novel imaging and blood-based biomarkers of neurodegeneration and vascular cognitive impairment to understand the pathophysiology, are needed to advance the field.

Health Care Delivery Interventions for Hypertension Management in Underserved Populations in the United States: A Systematic Review

[Figure: see text].

Association between antihypertensive treatment and adverse events: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between antihypertensive treatment and specific adverse events.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of adults receiving antihypertensives compared with placebo or no treatment, more antihypertensive drugs compared with fewer antihypertensive drugs, or higher blood pressure targets compared with lower targets. To avoid small early phase trials, studies were required to have at least 650 patient years of follow-up.

INFORMATION SOURCES

Searches were conducted in Embase, Medline, CENTRAL, and the Science Citation Index databases from inception until 14 April 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was falls during trial follow-up. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury, fractures, gout, hyperkalaemia, hypokalaemia, hypotension, and syncope. Additional outcomes related to death and major cardiovascular events were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and random effects meta-analysis was used to pool rate ratios, odds ratios, and hazard ratios across studies, allowing for between study heterogeneity (τ2).

RESULTS

Of 15 023 articles screened for inclusion, 58 randomised controlled trials were identified, including 280 638 participants followed up for a median of 3 (interquartile range 2-4) years. Most of the trials (n=40, 69%) had a low risk of bias. Among seven trials reporting data for falls, no evidence was found of an association with antihypertensive treatment (summary risk ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.24, τ2=0.009). Antihypertensives were associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.39, τ2=0.037, n=15), hyperkalaemia (1.89, 1.56 to 2.30, τ2=0.122, n=26), hypotension (1.97, 1.67 to 2.32, τ2=0.132, n=35), and syncope (1.28, 1.03 to 1.59, τ2=0.050, n=16). The heterogeneity between studies assessing acute kidney injury and hyperkalaemia events was reduced when focusing on drugs that affect the renin angiotensin-aldosterone system. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses focusing on adverse events leading to withdrawal from each trial. Antihypertensive treatment was associated with a reduced risk of all cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and stroke, but not of myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found no evidence to suggest that antihypertensive treatment is associated with falls but found evidence of an association with mild (hyperkalaemia, hypotension) and severe adverse events (acute kidney injury, syncope). These data could be used to inform shared decision making between doctors and patients about initiation and continuation of antihypertensive treatment, especially in patients at high risk of harm because of previous adverse events or poor renal function.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018116860.

Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Systematic Review Prepared for the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials suggest that treating patients with hypertension to lower blood pressure (BP) targets improves cardiovascular outcomes.

PURPOSE

To summarize the effects of intensive (or targeted) systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) lowering with pharmacologic treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and harms in adults with hypertension.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for relevant systematic reviews (SRs) published in English from 15 December 2013 through 25 March 2019, with updated targeted searches through 8 January 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

8 SRs of randomized controlled trials examining either a standardized SBP target of -10 mm Hg (1 SR) or BP lowering below a target threshold (7 SRs).

DATA EXTRACTION

One investigator abstracted data, assessed study quality, and performed GRADE assessments; a second investigator checked abstractions and assessments.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The main outcome of interest was reduction in composite cardiovascular outcomes. High-strength evidence showed benefit of a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes among patients with hypertension in the general population, patients with chronic kidney disease, and patients with heart failure. Evidence on reducing SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (moderate strength) or diabetes mellitus (high strength) to a lower SBP target was mixed. Low-strength evidence supported intensive lowering to a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of stroke. All reported harms were considered, including general adverse events, serious adverse events, cognitive impairment, fractures, falls, syncope, hypotension, withdrawals due to adverse events, and acute kidney injury. Safety results were mixed or inconclusive.

LIMITATIONS

This was a qualitative synthesis of new evidence with existing meta-analyses. Data were sparse for outcomes related to treating DBP to a lower target or for patients older than 60 years.

CONCLUSION

Overall, current clinical literature supports intensive BP lowering in patients with hypertension for improving cardiovascular outcomes. In most subpopulations, intensive lowering was favored over less-intensive lowering, but the data were less clear for patients with diabetes mellitus or cardiovascular disease.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration.