Why the study?
Does intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (goal < 120 mm Hg) reduce cardiovascular events compared to standard treatment (goal < 140 mm Hg) in older patients with cardiovascular risk but without diabetes or stroke?
RCT (n=9,361)
Open-label
Randomized
Yes
Does intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (goal < 120 mm Hg) reduce cardiovascular events compared to standard treatment (goal < 140 mm Hg) in older patients with cardiovascular risk but without diabetes or stroke?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Intensive blood pressure lowering to a systolic goal of <120 mm Hg reduces cardiovascular events and mortality in high-risk older adults without diabetes or stroke, but increases the risk of adverse events such as hypotension and acute kidney injury.
The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) found evidence of cardiovascular benefit with intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (goal < 120 mm Hg) compared with the currently recommended goal (< 140 mm Hg) in older patients with cardiovascular risk but without diabetes or stroke. This article reviews the trial design and protocol, summarizes the results, and briefly discusses the implications of these results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in Hypertension (n=9,361). Intensive blood pressure control (systolic goal < 120 mm Hg) vs. Standard blood pressure control (systolic goal < 140 mm Hg) was evaluated on Composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.75, p=<.05).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: