Baseline Diastolic BP and BP-Lowering Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes and All-Cause Mortality

Key Points There is concern that lowering systolic BP in persons with low diastolic BP could be harmful. In this meta-analysis of five large BP-lowering trials, BP interventions reduced the risks of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. However, there was no evidence that low baseline diastolic BP modified these beneficial effects of BP-lowering interventions. Background Lowering BP in persons with low diastolic BP could be harmful. Hence, we examined whether baseline diastolic BP modifies the effects of BP lowering on clinical outcomes in a meta-analysis of five large BP-lowering trials. Methods In a study-level meta-analysis on the basis of individual participant data of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT; N =9361), the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD; N =2362), the Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes (SPS3; N =3020), the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK; N =1094), and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD; N =840) studies, we used DerSimonian–Laird random-effects models to examine the dependence of the effect of the BP-lowering intervention on baseline diastolic BP for cardiovascular, all-cause mortality, and kidney outcomes. Results The mean baseline age was 65±10 years. Mean baseline systolic and diastolic BP were 141±17 and 79±12 mm Hg, respectively. More intensive BP control resulted in lower risk of composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.87) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.99) without evidence that the BP intervention effects differed by level of baseline diastolic BP (interaction P = 0.76 for cardiovascular composite and 0.85 for all-cause mortality). The mean baseline diastolic BP in the lowest and upper three quartiles of baseline diastolic BP were 65±6 and 84±9 mm Hg, respectively, but the effects of the BP interventions on the outcomes were similar in both groups. Furthermore, there was no evidence of interaction of the BP intervention and baseline diastolic BP for kidney outcomes. Conclusions Within the included diastolic BP range, there was no evidence that baseline diastolic BP modified the beneficial effects of intensive BP lowering.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Published
2024-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.0000000539
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.41
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Baseline Diastolic BP and BP-Lowering Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes and All-Cause Mortality

Jincheng Shen, Tom Greene, Glenn M. Chertow, Paul K. Whelton et al.
6 citations
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
2.41
article

Baseline Diastolic BP and BP-Lowering Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes and All-Cause Mortality

Jincheng Shen, Tom Greene, Glenn M. Chertow, Paul K. Whelton, Alfred K. Cheung, Sydney E. Hartsell, Robert E. Boucher, Srinivasan Beddhu, John W. McEvoy, Amara Sarwal, Guo Wei
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Key Points There is concern that lowering systolic BP in persons with low diastolic BP could be harmful. In this meta-analysis of five large BP-lowering trials, BP interventions reduced the risks of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. However, there was no evidence that low baseline diastolic BP modified these beneficial effects of BP-lowering interventions. Background Lowering BP in persons with low diastolic BP could be harmful. Hence, we examined whether baseline diastolic BP modifies the effects of BP lowering on clinical outcomes in a meta-analysis of five large BP-lowering trials. Methods In a study-level meta-analysis on the basis of individual participant data of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT; N =9361), the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD; N =2362), the Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes (SPS3; N =3020), the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK; N =1094), and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD; N =840) studies, we used DerSimonian–Laird random-effects models to examine the dependence of the effect of the BP-lowering intervention on baseline diastolic BP for cardiovascular, all-cause mortality, and kidney outcomes. Results The mean baseline age was 65±10 years. Mean baseline systolic and diastolic BP were 141±17 and 79±12 mm Hg, respectively. More intensive BP control resulted in lower risk of composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.87) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.99) without evidence that the BP intervention effects differed by level of baseline diastolic BP (interaction P = 0.76 for cardiovascular composite and 0.85 for all-cause mortality). The mean baseline diastolic BP in the lowest and upper three quartiles of baseline diastolic BP were 65±6 and 84±9 mm Hg, respectively, but the effects of the BP interventions on the outcomes were similar in both groups. Furthermore, there was no evidence of interaction of the BP intervention and baseline diastolic BP for kidney outcomes. Conclusions Within the included diastolic BP range, there was no evidence that baseline diastolic BP modified the beneficial effects of intensive BP lowering.

Journal of the American Society of NephrologyVol. 36(5)
Tulane University (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), University of Utah (US), VA Salt Lake City Healthcare System (US), Stanford University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
2.41
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.