CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

When high‐volume PCI operators in high‐volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals—Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes? Guidelines in review: Comparison of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes and the 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation Complete Revascularization Versus Culprit Lesion Only in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: A DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Substudy Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations Clopidogrel or ticagrelor in acute coronary syndrome patients treated with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: CHANGE DAPT Qualitative Methodology in Cardiovascular Outcomes Research: A Contemporary Look Microthrombi As A Major Cause of Cardiac Injury in COVID-19: A Pathologic Study ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: A Report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Association between urinary dickkopf-3, acute kidney injury, and subsequent loss of kidney function in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: an observational cohort study Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations

Clinical Trial2024 Jul 20;404(10449):245-255.

JOURNAL:Lancet. Article Link

Lowering systolic blood pressure to less than 120 mm Hg versus less than 140 mm Hg in patients with high cardiovascular risk with and without diabetes or previous stroke: an open-label,blinded-outcome,randomised trial

JM Liu, Y Li; ESPRIT Collaborative Group. Keywords: hypertension control; ASCVD prevention

ABSTRCT

BACKGROUND -  Uncertainty exists about whether lowering systolic blood pressure to less than 120 mm Hg is superior to that of less than 140 mm Hg, particularly in patients with diabetes and patients with previous stroke.

METHODS - In this open-label, blinded-outcome, randomised controlled trial, participants with high cardiovascular risk were enrolled from 116 hospitals or communities in China. We used minimised randomisation to assign participants to intensive treatment targeting standard office systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg or standard treatment targeting less than 140 mm Hg. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, revascularisation, hospitalisation for heart failure, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes, assessed by the intention-to-treat principle. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04030234.


FINDINGS - Between Sept 17, 2019, and July 13, 2020, 11 255 participants (4359 with diabetes and 3022 with previous stroke) were assigned to intensive treatment (n=5624) or standard treatment (n=5631). Their mean age was 64·6 years (SD 7·1). The mean systolic blood pressure throughout the follow-up (except the first 3 months of titration) was 119·1 mm Hg (SD 11·1) in the intensive treatment group and 134·8 mm Hg (10·5) in the standard treatment group. During a median of 3·4 years of follow-up, the primary outcome event occurred in 547 (9·7%) participants in the intensive treatment group and 623 (11·1%) in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·78-0·99; p=0·028). There was no heterogeneity of effects by diabetes status, duration of diabetes, or history of stroke. Serious adverse events of syncope occurred more frequently in the intensive treatment group (24 [0·4%] of 5624) than in standard treatment group (eight [0·1%] of 5631; HR 3·00, 95% CI 1·35-6·68). There was no significant between-group difference in the serious adverse events of hypotension, electrolyte abnormality, injurious fall, or acute kidney injury.


INTERPRETATION - For hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk, regardless of the status of diabetes or history of stroke, the treatment strategy of targeting systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with that of less than 140 mm Hg, prevents major vascular events, with minor excess risk.


FUNDING -The Ministry of Science and Technology of China and Fuwai Hospital.


TRANSLATION - For the Mandarin translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.