Why the study?
Does treatment of blood pressure to lower targets (≤ 130/80 mmHg) reduce total mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic renal disease and elevated arterial blood pressure compared to standard targets?
Does treatment of blood pressure to lower targets (≤ 130/80 mmHg) reduce total mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic renal disease and elevated arterial blood pressure compared to standard targets?
This protocol outlines a Cochrane Review to evaluate whether lower blood pressure targets (≤ 130/80 mmHg) reduce mortality and morbidity compared to standard targets in patients with chronic renal disease.
No practice change from protocol alone; leaves open optimal BP targets in CKD pending evidence synthesis.
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: Primary objective To determine if there is a reduction in total mortality and morbidity associated with treatment of blood pressure to "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets" in the management of patients with chronic renal disease and elevated arterial blood pressure. "Lower targets" are defined as blood pressure targets less than or equal to 130/80 mmHg. "Standard targets" are defined as blood pressure targets less than or equal to 140‐160 mmHg systolic and/or blood pressure targets less than or equal to 90‐100 mmHg diastolic. Secondary objectives To determine if there is a change in mean achieved systolic and diastolic blood pressure associated with "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets" in patients with chronic renal disease with elevated blood pressure. To determine if there is a change in withdrawals due to adverse events with "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets", in patients with chronic renal disease with elevated blood pressure. To determine if there is a change in mean decline in glomerular filtration rate with "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets", in patients with chronic renal disease with elevated blood pressure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arguedas et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: