Abstract 4360705: Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Hypertension (HTN), a prevalent comorbidity in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), increases the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, mortality, and kidney complications. However, optimal blood pressure (BP) targets in patients with T2DM remain unclear. Research Question: Does intensive BP control, compared to standard targets, reduce CV, renal, and mortality outcomes in patients with T2DM? Aims: We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of intensive vs. standard BP control on CV and kidney outcomes and mortality in T2DM patients. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was conducted through December 2024 for trials comparing intensive vs. standard BP control in patients with T2DM. Outcomes assessed included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, major adverse CV events (MACE), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), incident heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease (CKD) development, albuminuria, and serious adverse events (SAEs). Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. Results: 28 trials encompassing 104,634 patients were included. Intensive BP control significantly reduced the risk of CV mortality (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65–0.87, P = 0.0001), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76–0.95, P = 0.004), MACE (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.75–0.87, P < 0.00001), stroke (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61–0.80, P < 0.00001), MI (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79–0.94, P = 0.001), HF (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.96, P = 0.02), and albuminuria (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.97, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences in CKD development (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.92–1.26, P = 0.36) or SAEs (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.97–1.40, P = 0.10). Conclusions: Intensive BP control in patients with T2DM was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, CV mortality, MACE, stroke, MI, HF, and albuminuria as compared to standard control, without an increased risk of serious adverse events.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.152.suppl_3.4360705
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4360705: Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Mohammad Imran Khan, Jamal S. Rana, Ahmed Kamal Siddiqi, Nicholas Chew et al.
Circulation
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
article

Abstract 4360705: Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Mohammad Imran Khan, Jamal S. Rana, Ahmed Kamal Siddiqi, Nicholas Chew, Anandita Agarwala, Kumail Mustafa Ali, Muhammad Talha Maniya
article en

Abstract

Background: Hypertension (HTN), a prevalent comorbidity in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), increases the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, mortality, and kidney complications. However, optimal blood pressure (BP) targets in patients with T2DM remain unclear. Research Question: Does intensive BP control, compared to standard targets, reduce CV, renal, and mortality outcomes in patients with T2DM? Aims: We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of intensive vs. standard BP control on CV and kidney outcomes and mortality in T2DM patients. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was conducted through December 2024 for trials comparing intensive vs. standard BP control in patients with T2DM. Outcomes assessed included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, major adverse CV events (MACE), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), incident heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease (CKD) development, albuminuria, and serious adverse events (SAEs). Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. Results: 28 trials encompassing 104,634 patients were included. Intensive BP control significantly reduced the risk of CV mortality (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65–0.87, P = 0.0001), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76–0.95, P = 0.004), MACE (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.75–0.87, P < 0.00001), stroke (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61–0.80, P < 0.00001), MI (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79–0.94, P = 0.001), HF (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.96, P = 0.02), and albuminuria (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.97, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences in CKD development (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.92–1.26, P = 0.36) or SAEs (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.97–1.40, P = 0.10). Conclusions: Intensive BP control in patients with T2DM was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, CV mortality, MACE, stroke, MI, HF, and albuminuria as compared to standard control, without an increased risk of serious adverse events.

CirculationVol. 152(Suppl_3)
Kaiser Permanente (US), Emory University (US), National University of Singapore (SG), Jinnah Sindh Medical University (PK), Baylor Scott & White Health (US), Ziauddin University (PK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
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.