0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Review |

Antihypertensive Treatment and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Events Among Persons Without Hypertension:  A Meta-analysis FREE

Angela M. Thompson, MSPH; Tian Hu, MS, BM; Carrie L. Eshelbrenner, MD; Kristi Reynolds, PhD; Jiang He, MD, PhD; Lydia A. Bazzano, MD, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine (Ms Thompson, Mr Hu, and Drs He and Bazzano), and Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine (Drs Eshelbrenner, He, and Bazzano), New Orleans, Louisiana; and Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena (Dr Reynolds).


JAMA. 2011;305(9):913-922. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.250.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Context Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk increases beginning at systolic blood pressure levels of 115 mm Hg. Use of antihypertensive medications among patients with a history of CVD or diabetes and without hypertension has been debated.

Objective To evaluate the effect of antihypertensive treatment on secondary prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality among persons without clinically defined hypertension.

Data Sources Meta-analysis with systematic search of MEDLINE (1950 to week 3 of January 2011), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials and manual examination of references in selected articles and studies.

Study Selection From 874 potentially relevant publications, 25 trials that fulfilled the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis.

Data Extraction Information on participant characteristics, trial design and duration, treatment drug, dose, control, and clinical events were extracted using a standardized protocol. Outcomes included stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), congestive heart failure (CHF), composite CVD outcomes, CVD mortality, and all-cause mortality.

Results Compared with controls, participants receiving antihypertensive medications had a pooled relative risk of 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.98) for stroke, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.93) for MI, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.77) for CHF, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80 to 0.90) for composite CVD events, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99) for CVD mortality, and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80 to 0.95) for all-cause mortality from random-effects models. The corresponding absolute risk reductions per 1000 persons were −7.7 (95% CI, −15.2 to −0.3) for stroke, −13.3 (95% CI, −28.4 to 1.7) for MI, −43.6 (95% CI, −65.2 to −22.0) for CHF events, −27.1 (95% CI, −40.3 to −13.9) for composite CVD events, −15.4 (95% CI, −32.5 to 1.7) for CVD mortality, and −13.7 (95% CI, −24.6 to −2.8) for all-cause mortality. Results did not differ according to trial characteristics or subgroups defined by clinical history.

Conclusions Among patients with clinical history of CVD but without hypertension, antihypertensive treatment was associated with decreased risk of stroke, CHF, composite CVD events, and all-cause mortality. Additional randomized trial data are necessary to assess these outcomes in patients without CVD clinical recommendations.

Figures in this Article

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in the United States and globally, representing 30% of all deaths worldwide.1 Prospective cohort studies have established a strong, graded, and independent positive association between blood pressure levels and risk of CVD, stroke, and premature death.2,3 Increased CVD risk begins at systolic blood pressure levels as low as 115 mm Hg, with 54% of stroke and 46% of ischemic heart disease events occurring in persons with blood pressures in this range.4 In persons with prehypertension, 90% have at least 1 risk factor above optimal levels for heart disease or stroke, and 68% have at least 1 clinically high-risk factor for heart disease or stroke.5

Among adults 35 years and older, more than 17% of those with normal blood pressure and 37% of those with blood pressure in the prehypertensive range (130-139 mm Hg systolic, 86-89 mm Hg diastolic) progress to overt hypertension within 4 years without changes in lifestyle or pharmacological intervention.6 In adults 55 years and older, lifetime risk of developing hypertension is greater than 90%.7 Recent national surveys report that more than 30% of the general adult population in the United States, Korea, and China has prehypertension.810

Clinical trials have documented that lowering blood pressure reduces cardiovascular mortality among patients with hypertension.3,11 Several randomized controlled trials of blood pressure lowering for the prevention of CVD have demonstrated benefit among persons with prehypertension or normal blood pressures,12,13 while others have not shown benefit.14,15 Given these conflicting results, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that examine antihypertensive treatment among persons with blood pressures in the prehypertensive or normal range for the primary or secondary prevention of CVD may help clarify this issue. The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the association between antihypertensive treatment and secondary prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality among persons without clinically defined hypertension (≥140 mm Hg systolic or ≥90 mm Hg diastolic and/or use of antihypertensive medications or history of hypertension).

Study Selection

We searched online databases including MEDLINE (1950 to week 3 of January 2011), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials using the following terms as Medical Subject Headings and keywords: hypertension or blood pressure or normal blood pressure or prehypertension or pre-hypertension or pre-hypertensive or normotensive and antihypertensive agents, and cardiovascular disease. No language restrictions were applied. Searches were limited to randomized clinical trials in human participants 19 years or older. A manual examination of references in selected articles was also performed.

The titles and abstracts of 874 potentially relevant references were identified through the literature search and reviewed independently by 3 investigators (A.M.T., T.H., C.L.E.) to determine whether they met eligibility criteria for inclusion. Discrepancies regarding whether to include or exclude a study were resolved by consensus with other investigators (J.H., L.A.B.).

Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized controlled trials of antihypertensive treatment among persons with blood pressure less than 140 mm Hg systolic or less than 90 mm Hg diastolic for the prevention of CVD events (fatal or nonfatal stroke, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], congestive heart failure [CHF], or CVD mortality). For studies that produced multiple publications, data from the most recent or most complete publication were included in the analysis.

Studies were excluded if CVD events were not reported by hypertension status in studies that included participants with and without hypertension; the study population did not include persons with blood pressure in the normal or prehypertensive ranges; the study population did not include persons with preexisting CVD or CVD equivalents, such as diabetes; antihypertensive treatment was not part of the intervention; treatment allocation was not random; a measure of variance (P value or confidence interval [CI]) was not reported or could not be calculated from the information provided; participants were younger than 18 years; or there were differences between intervention and control groups other than antihypertensive treatment.

Data Abstraction

All data were independently abstracted by 3 investigators (A.M.T., T.H., C.L.E.) using a standardized data collection form. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion with other investigators (J.H., L.A.B.) and through reference to the original articles. We attempted to contact study authors for additional information when necessary. Trial characteristics abstracted included design of the randomized controlled trial, type of control, number of treatment groups, description of treatment regimens, description of inclusion and exclusion criteria, numbers of fatal and nonfatal events, definition of participants without hypertension, and demographic characteristics of study populations at baseline. The outcomes recorded included incidence of stroke, MI, CHF events, composite CVD events (as defined by the study), CVD mortality, and all-cause mortality.

The definition of nonhypertensive varied in each study; however, all studies included in this analysis had populations with blood pressure less than 140 mm Hg systolic, less than 90 mm Hg diastolic, or no clinical history of hypertension at baseline. The study-specific definitions of persons without hypertension and outcomes included in this analysis are provided in eTable 1 and eTable 2.

Quality Assessment

Two authors (A.M.T., T.H.) independently evaluated quality of each study using an established tool.16 Nine domains were assessed: randomization, concealment of treatment allocation, similarity of groups at baseline, eligibility criteria, blinding of outcome assessor, patient and care provider, point estimates, and intention-to-treat analysis. Disagreement was resolved through consensus and discussion.

Statistical Analysis

For studies that provided an effect estimate such as a relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio, the study-provided effect estimate was directly used in the pooled meta-analysis calculations. For studies that published number of events but did not publish an effect estimate, this information was used to calculate the RR of each outcome for the intervention compared with the placebo group. We logarithmically transformed the RR and corresponding standard error to stabilize the variance and normalize the distribution. We calculated the overall pooled-effect estimates using inverse-variance weighting to calculate both fixed-effects and DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models.17 The Q test was used to assess the presence of heterogeneity and the I2 index to quantify the extent of heterogeneity.18,19 Fixed- and random-effects models yielded similar findings, but we detected between-study heterogeneity for several outcomes; therefore, results from the random-effects models are presented. Absolute risk reductions for individual studies were calculated as the difference in event rates between treatment and control groups based on the reported or estimated number of events for each outcome. Pooled absolute risk reductions were calculated using inverse-variance weighted DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models.

To assess for publication bias, we constructed funnel plots for each outcome in which the ln(RR) was plotted against its standard error. The Begg rank correlation test was used to examine the asymmetry of the funnel plot,20 and the Egger weighted linear regression test was used to examine the association between mean effect estimate and its variance.21 Prestated subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the influence of the presence or absence of comorbid conditions at baseline and class of antihypertensive treatment. We then conducted sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of the results and restricted analyses by antihypertensive medication use at baseline, definition of persons without hypertension, trial size, duration of follow-up, and year of publication. Additionally, we conducted sensitivity analyses whereby each study was excluded in turn to evaluate the relative influence of each trial on the pooled estimates. P < .05 was considered statistically significant, and all tests were 2-sided. All analyses were conducted in STATA version 9.2 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas).

Of 874 potentially relevant studies identified in the initial literature search, 25 were included in the meta-analysis (Figure 1). Table 1 describes the characteristics of trials included in the meta-analysis. The class and dose of medication administered in the antihypertensive treatment group varied between studies, but for most studies it progressively increased to a defined target dose. Study duration ranged from a mean length of 1.5 to 63 months. Entry criteria also varied between studies; however, all studies required a history of CVD; clinical evidence of recent MI, CHF, coronary artery disease, or stroke; or CVD equivalent such as type 2 diabetes.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1. Selection Process for Studies Included in the Meta-analysis.
Graphic Jump Location
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Characteristics of Randomized Clinical Trials of Antihypertensive Medications Included in the Meta-analysis (N = 25)a

The 25 studies included in the meta-analysis incorporated data from 64 162 participants without hypertension (Table 2). The mean age of participants in the studies ranged from 55.0 to 68.0 years, and 76% of study participants were men. Clinical history of MI, CHF, diabetes, stroke, and coronary artery disease at baseline varied between studies.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Baseline Characteristics of Participants Without Hypertension in Randomized Controlled Trials of Antihypertension Medications

Pooled overall RRs and absolute risk reductions per 1000 persons are presented in Figure 2 and Figure 3 for all study outcomes. There was a 23% reduction in risk of stroke (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.98]), 20% reduction in risk of MI (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.93]), 29% reduction in risk of CHF events (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.65 to 0.77]), 15% reduction in risk of composite CVD events (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.90]), 17% reduction in risk for CVD mortality (RR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99]), and a 13% reduction in risk for all-cause mortality (RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.95]). The absolute risk reduction per 1000 persons was −7.7 (95% CI, −15.2 to −0.3) for stroke, −13.3 (95% CI, −28.4 to 1.7) for MI, −43.6 (95% CI, −65.2 to −22.0) for CHF events, −27.1 (95% CI, −40.3 to −13.9) for composite CVD events, −15.4 (95% CI, −32.5 to 1.7) for CVD mortality, and −13.7 (95% CI, −24.6 to −2.8) for all-cause mortality.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2. Pooled Relative Risks and Absolute Risk Reductions for Fatal or Nonfatal Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and Congestive Heart Failure and Composite Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes
Graphic Jump Location

CI indicates confidence interval; CVD, cardiovascular disease; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported. Sizes of data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis. For expansions of study names, see Table 1 footnote.
aNumber of events could not be calculated from information provided.
bNumber of events was estimated from information provided.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3. Pooled Relative Risks and Absolute Risk Reductions for Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality
Graphic Jump Location

CI indicates confidence interval; CVD, cardiovascular disease; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported. Sizes of data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis. For expansions of study names, see Table 1 footnote.

I2 values were calculated to quantify heterogeneity between studies. The I2 values were 26.5% (P = .24) and 0.0% (P = .85) for MI and CHF events, indicating low heterogeneity between studies. Moderate heterogeneity was detected for stroke events (I2 = 61.9% [P = .02 from Q test]), composite CVD events (I2 = 35.4% [P = .10]), CVD mortality (I2 = 43.6% [P = .12]), and all-cause mortality (I2 = 46.1% [P = .03]).

We found no evidence of publication bias as indicated by Begg rank correlation test for any outcome examined. However, possible publication bias was detected for stroke (P = .04) using Egger linear regression tests. Applying the trim and fill adjustment method produced no change in the overall effect estimate for stroke. Exclusion of any single study did not change the significance of the pooled estimates for CHF events, composite CVD outcomes, and all-cause mortality. After individual exclusion of the SOLVD, ABCD, PEACE, PROGRESS, or PATS studies, treatment with antihypertensive medications no longer showed a statistically significant benefit for the outcome of stroke. After exclusion of the SOLVD study, antihypertensive treatment for the prevention of MI no longer showed statistically significant benefit. For the prevention of CVD mortality, the benefit of antihypertensive treatment among persons without hypertension was no longer statistically significant after omission of TRACE, AIRE, or SAVE.

We conducted sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of the results for the composite CVD outcome and all-cause mortality (eTable 3). Sensitivity analyses were not conducted for the outcomes of stroke, MI, CHF, and CVD mortality because of the small number of studies and events. Results did not differ according to any of these criteria. On a 9-point scale, our quality assessment scores ranged from 7.0 to 9.0 for all studies included. The median score was 9.0 points, and these studies were considered to be excellent quality. There was no difference in the association of antihypertensive treatment and composite CVD outcome or all-cause mortality after exclusion of studies that scored fewer than 9 points (MIS and BHAT received 8 points each; MPI, ASPS, and ABCD received 7 points each).

Additionally, we conducted subgroup analyses to examine whether the association of antihypertensive treatment differed among persons with clinical history of MI or coronary artery disease, those with preexisting CHF, and those with history of diabetes or class of antihypertensive medication (eTable 4). There was little change in the overall effect estimates by clinical history for any of the outcomes, with the exception of diabetes. For prevention of composite CVD outcomes and all-cause mortality, no statistically significant benefit of antihypertensive treatment was reported in trials conducted exclusively in patients with diabetes; however, these results should be interpreted cautiously because of the limited number of trials.

Blood pressure change from baseline to follow-up was available for nonhypertensive participants in 3 studies.14,37,54 The blood pressure difference between the treatment and placebo groups at the end of the intervention period was significantly different only for those in the ABCD normotensive study.14

This meta-analysis is unique in that, to our knowledge, it is the first to focus on the association of antihypertensive medication use and secondary prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality among persons without clinically defined hypertension. Our results show that persons with a history of CVD but with blood pressures in the normal and prehypertensive ranges can obtain significant benefit from antihypertensive treatments. The overall pooled results for antihypertensive treatment compared with control showed a significant reduction in risk for fatal or nonfatal stroke, CHF events, composite CVD events, an all-cause mortality. For fatal and nonfatal MI and for CVD mortality, the pooled relative risk reduction was significant but the pooled absolute risk reduction did not achieve statistical significance. This discrepancy reflects the increased variance of the absolute measures compared with the variance of the relative measures. Results for the outcomes studied were consistent across subgroups and did not differ significantly by trial characteristics.

Risk for CVD increases monotonically at all blood pressure levels in the normotensive and prehypertensive range.2,3 Although prehypertension affects nearly 70 million adults in the United States and is associated with an increased risk of CVD similar to that seen for those with hypertension, the use of antihypertensive treatment among persons with blood pressures less than 140/90 mm Hg has been debated.6672 According to the current algorithm for treatment of hypertension in persons with compelling indications (CHF, post-MI, high coronary disease risk, and recurrent stroke prevention), pharmacological treatment is indicated for those whose blood pressure is not controlled to less than 140/90 mm Hg with lifestyle intervention alone.3 Hypertension precedes the development of CHF in the majority of patients and increases risk for MI and CHF.3

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that persons with these compelling indications but without hypertension may also benefit from reduced morbidity and mortality attributable to CVD events when treated with antihypertensive medications. In persons 40 years and older with prehypertension, more than 90% have at least 1 above-optimal risk factor, and more than 68% have at least 1 clinically high risk factor for heart disease or stroke.5 Although pharmacological treatment for all individuals in this population would not be economically feasible, a more reasonable strategy might be to identify groups within the prehypertensive population who would obtain the greatest benefit from early pharmacological intervention.

For patients with diabetes, the current algorithm for treatment of hypertension indicates pharmacological treatment for those whose blood pressure is not controlled to less than 130/80 mm Hg with lifestyle intervention alone.3 Recent findings reported from the ACCORD BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure) trial conducted in patients with diabetes demonstrated no reduction in the rate of fatal or nonfatal CVD events when systolic blood pressure was controlled to less than 120 mm Hg compared with less than 140 mm Hg.73 The ACCORD BP trial included participants with systolic blood pressures of 130 to 180 mm Hg who were taking 3 or fewer antihypertensive medications at baseline. The results of our meta-analysis show that for the prevention of composite CVD outcomes and all-cause mortality, no benefit of antihypertensive treatment was seen in trials conducted in patients with diabetes and without hypertension. Our findings should be interpreted with caution because of the small number of studies in such patients.

We identified only 2 studies of antihypertensive treatment conducted in populations with blood pressures less than 140/90 mm Hg and without a history of CVD or diabetes.74,75 The primary objective of both trials was to examine the prevention of hypertension in persons with blood pressure in the prehypertensive range, but CVD events were also examined. Although both studies were small and had relatively few events, there was an indication of possible benefit overall. Additional studies are needed to determine if any benefit of antihypertensive treatment would be obtained in populations without hypertension or clinical history of CVD.

We were able to identify no evidence among populations with specific risk factors such as elevated lipid levels, history of smoking, or chronic kidney disease. Additionally, few studies included racial and ethnic minorities or reported results according to race/ethnicity. Because of the increased risk for CVD events in the presence of these risk factors, additional studies should be conducted to determine if there is benefit of treating prehypertension at levels less than 140/90 mm Hg in populations with these risk factors. Although antihypertensive agents, including β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and calcium channel blockers are generally well tolerated, deleterious adverse effects are not uncommon and can be serious.

The primary strength of this meta-analysis was its inclusion of only randomized controlled trials, which are less subject to bias and confounding than observational studies. Additionally, study characteristics were very similar at baseline, lending confidence to the findings.

The primary limitation of this meta-analysis was the dearth of studies reporting the outcomes of interest for normotensive and prehypertensive participants. Few studies included in this meta-analysis presented the results by baseline blood pressure levels and treatment regimen; therefore, it was not possible to determine the dose-response relationship between baseline blood pressure and risk of first occurrence or recurrence of CVD events among persons with blood pressure less than 140/90 mm Hg. Additional studies should be conducted to examine the baseline blood pressure level at which antihypertensive treatment should begin in persons with CVD or CVD equivalents such as diabetes.

Moreover, this meta-analysis is not a mechanistic study; thus, we cannot determine whether the benefit associated with use of antihypertensive treatment was attributable to blood pressure lowering or to other tissue or neurohormonal mechanisms. Additionally, it is possible that misclassification of participants may have occurred owing to variations in methods of blood pressure measurement across studies included in the meta-analysis; however, less stringent methods of measurement may overdiagnose hypertension among participants. Because of the small number of studies included, potential publication bias and the influence of heterogeneity between studies cannot be ruled out.

Although we calculated the effect estimate from available data when it was not provided in the published data, it is possible that confounding occurred owing to differential loss to follow-up by treatment group. In addition, the statistical methods resulted in a discrepancy for the findings of 2 outcomes (MI and CVD mortality), perhaps reflecting the increased variance of the absolute measures compared with the variance of the relative measures, which may be compounded by the effect of pooling. Lastly, the total numbers of events were unavailable in some studies; therefore, the counts of events were estimated from the effect estimate and other information provided in the text of publications.13,59 It was not possible to estimate the total number of events in the COPERNICUS or TRANSCEND studies from the information provided in the text.15,48 A collaborative meta-analysis pooling individual-patient data could serve to eliminate many of these limitations.

Prehypertension affects nearly 30% of the adult population and carries an elevated risk for CVD incidence and mortality. To our knowledge, this meta-analysis is the first to examine the association between antihypertensive medications and CVD morbidity and mortality as well as all-cause mortality in individuals without hypertension. Among patients with clinical history of CVD but without hypertension, antihypertensive treatment was associated with decreased risk of stroke, CHF, composite CVD events, and all-cause mortality. Additional randomized trial data are necessary to assess these outcomes in patients without CVD clinical recommendations.

Corresponding Author: Lydia A. Bazzano, MD, PhD, Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, 1440 Canal St, SL-18, New Orleans, LA 70112-2715 (lbazzano@tulane.edu).

Author Contributions: Ms Thompson and Dr Bazzano had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Reynolds, He, Bazzano.

Acquisition of data: Thompson, Hu, Eshelbrenner, Bazzano.

Analysis and interpretation of data: Thompson, Hu, He, Bazzano.

Drafting of the manuscript: Thompson, Hu, Bazzano.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Thompson, Hu, Eshelbrenner, Reynolds, He, Bazzano.

Statistical analysis: Thompson, Eshelbrenner, Bazzano.

Obtained funding: He, Bazzano.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Hu, Eshelbrenner, Bazzano.

Study supervision: He, Bazzano.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.

Funding/Support: Ms Thompson is supported by a grant from the Research Enhancement Fund of Tulane University. Dr He is supported by research grants R01 HL087263 and R01 HL090682 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), National Institutes of Health. Dr Bazzano is supported by grant K08 HL091108 from the NHLBI.

Role of the Sponsor: The funding organizations and sponsors had no role in the design and conduct of the study; the collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; or the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.

This article was corrected for errors on April 8, 2011.

Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990-2020: Global Burden of Disease Study.  Lancet. 1997;349(9064):1498-1504
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R.Prospective Studies Collaboration.  Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies.  Lancet. 2002;360(9349):1903-1913
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR,  et al; Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee.  Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.  Hypertension. 2003;42(6):1206-1252
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lawes CM, Vander Hoorn S, Rodgers A.International Society of Hypertension.  Global burden of blood-pressure-related disease, 2001.  Lancet. 2008;371(9623):1513-1518
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Greenlund KJ, Croft JB, Mensah GA. Prevalence of heart disease and stroke risk factors in persons with prehypertension in the United States, 1999-2000.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(19):2113-2118
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, Kannel WB, Levy D. Assessment of frequency of progression to hypertension in non-hypertensive participants in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort study.  Lancet. 2001;358(9294):1682-1686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vasan RS, Beiser A, Seshadri S,  et al.  Residual lifetime risk for developing hypertension in middle-aged women and men: the Framingham Heart Study.  JAMA. 2002;287(8):1003-1010
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang Y, Wang QJ. The prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension among US adults according to the new Joint National Committee guidelines: new challenges of the old problem.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(19):2126-2134
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Choi KM, Park HS, Han JH,  et al.  Prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension in a Korean population: Korean National Health and Nutrition Survey 2001.  J Hypertens. 2006;24(8):1515-1521
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gu D, Reynolds K, Wu X,  et al; InterASIA Collaborative Group. The International Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease in ASIA.  Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in China.  Hypertension. 2002;40(6):920-927
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Whelton PK, He J. Blood pressure reduction. In: Buring JE, Manson JE, Ridker PM, eds. Clinical Trials in Cardiovascular Disease. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2004:282-296
Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Libby P,  et al; CAMELOT Investigators.  Effect of antihypertensive agents on cardiovascular events in patients with coronary disease and normal blood pressure: the CAMELOT study: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2004;292(18):2217-2225
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Remme WJ, Deckers JW, Fox KM, Ferrari R, Bertrand M, Simoons ML.EUROPA Investigators.  Secondary prevention of coronary disease with ACE inhibition—does blood pressure reduction with perindopril explain the benefits in EUROPA?  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2009;23(2):161-170
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schrier RW, Estacio RO, Esler A, Mehler P. Effects of aggressive blood pressure control in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients on albuminuria, retinopathy and strokes.  Kidney Int. 2002;61(3):1086-1097
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yusuf S, Teo K, Anderson C,  et al; Telmisartan Randomised AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease (TRANSCEND) Investigators.  Effects of the angiotensin-receptor blocker telmisartan on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients intolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: a randomised controlled trial.  Lancet. 2008;372(9644):1174-1183
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verhagen AP, de Vet HCW, de Bie RA,  et al.  The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus.  J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(12):1235-1241
PubMed   |  Link to Article
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials.  Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177-188
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.  Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539-1558
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?  Psychol Methods. 2006;11(2):193-206
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias.  Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088-1101
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.  BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629-634
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol: a multicentre international study.  Br Med J. 1975;3(5986):735-740
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Baber NS, Evans DW, Howitt G,  et al.  Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Yugoslavia.  Br Heart J. 1980;44(1):96-100
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Beta-Blocker Heart Attack Trial Research Group.  A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction, I: mortality results.  JAMA. 1982;247(12):1707-1714
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Australian and Swedish Pindolol Study Group.  The effect of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction.  Eur Heart J. 1983;4(6):367-375
PubMed
Swedberg K, Held P, Kjekshus J, Rasmussen K, Rydén L, Wedel H. Effects of the early administration of enalapril on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the Cooperative New Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study II (CONSENSUS II).  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):678-684
PubMed   |  Link to Article
CONSENSUS Trial Study Group.  Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS).  N Engl J Med. 1987;316(23):1429-1435
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kostis JB. The effect of enalapril on mortal and morbid events in patients with hypertension and left ventricular dysfunction.  Am J Hypertens. 1995;8(9):909-914
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 1991;325(5):293-302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions.  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):685-691
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Studies of left ventricular dysfunction (SOLVD)—rationale, design and methods: two trials that evaluate the effect of enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction.  Am J Cardiol. 1990;66(3):315-322
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Packer M, Bristow MR, Cohn JN,  et al; U.S. Carvedilol Heart Failure Study Group.  The effect of carvedilol on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 1996;334(21):1349-1355
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gustafsson F, Torp-Pedersen C, Køber L, Hildebrandt P.TRACE Study Group.  Effect of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition after acute myocardial infarction in patients with arterial hypertension.  J Hypertens. 1997;15(7):793-798L
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Køber L, Torp-Pedersen C, Carlsen JE,  et al; Trandolapril Cardiac Evaluation (TRACE) Study Group.  A clinical trial of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor trandolapril in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction.  N Engl J Med. 1995;333(25):1670-1676
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cleland JG, Erhardt L, Hall AS, Winter C, Ball SG. Validation of primary and secondary outcomes and classification of mode of death among patients with clinical evidence of heart failure after a myocardial infarction: a report from the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) Study Investigators.  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1993;22:(suppl 9)  S22-S27
PubMed
Spargias K, Ball S, Hall A. The prognostic significance of a history of systemic hypertension in patients randomised to either placebo or ramipril following acute myocardial infarction: evidence from the AIRE study.  J Hum Hypertens. 1999;13(8):511-516
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Borghi C, Bacchelli S, Esposti DD, Bignamini A, Magnani B, Ambrosioni E.SMILE Study Investigators.  Effects of the administration of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor during the acute phase of myocardial infarction in patients with arterial hypertension.  Am J Hypertens. 1999;12(7):665-672
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B. Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation (SMILE) study: rationale, design, organization, and outcome definitions.  Control Clin Trials. 1994;15(3):201-210
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B.Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation (SMILE) Study Investigators.  The effect of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor zofenopril on mortality and morbidity after anterior myocardial infarction.  N Engl J Med. 1995;332(2):80-85
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hjalmarson A, Goldstein S, Fagerberg B,  et al; MERIT-HF Study Group.  Effects of controlled-release metoprolol on total mortality, hospitalizations, and well-being in patients with heart failure: the Metoprolol CR/XL Randomized Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF).  JAMA. 2000;283(10):1295-1302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu L.Chinese Cardiac Study (CCS-I) Collaborative Group.  Long-term mortality in patients with myocardial infarction: impact of early treatment with captopril for 4 weeks.  Chin Med J (Engl). 2001;114(2):115-118
PubMed
Chinese Cardiac Study (CCS-1) Collaborative Group.  Oral captopril versus placebo among 14,962 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial.  Chin Med J (Engl). 1997;110(11):834-838
PubMed
Sleight P, Yusuf S, Pogue J, Tsuyuki R, Diaz R, Probstfield J.Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study.  Blood-pressure reduction and cardiovascular risk in HOPE study.  Lancet. 2001;358(9299):2130-2131
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.  Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy.  Lancet. 2000;355(9200):253-259
PubMed   |  Link to Article
HOPE Study Investigators.  The HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) study: the design of a large, simple randomized trial of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ramipril) and vitamin E in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events.  Can J Cardiol. 1996;12(2):127-137
PubMed
Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, Bosch J, Davies R, Dagenais G.The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.  N Engl J Med. 2000;342(3):145-153
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Estacio RO, Savage S, Nagel NJ, Schrier RW. Baseline characteristics of participants in the Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes trial.  Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(3):242-257
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rouleau JL, Roecker EB, Tendera M,  et al; Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival Study Group.  Influence of pretreatment systolic blood pressure on the effect of carvedilol in patients with severe chronic heart failure: the Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival (COPERNICUS) study.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(8):1423-1429
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Packer M, Coats AJS, Fowler MB,  et al; Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival Study Group.  Effect of carvedilol on survival in severe chronic heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 2001;344(22):1651-1658
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Marre M, Lievre M, Chatellier G, Mann JF, Passa P, Ménard J.DIABHYCAR Study Investigators.  Effects of low dose ramipril on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and raised excretion of urinary albumin: randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial (the DIABHYCAR study).  BMJ. 2004;328(7438):495
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Braunwald E, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE,  et al; PEACE Trial Investigators.  Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease.  N Engl J Med. 2004;351(20):2058-2068
PubMed   |  Link to Article
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center.  PEACE study formal data request 383. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Web site. https://biolincc.nhlbi.nih.gov/login/?next=/requests/data-formal-request/383/. 2010. Accessed July 21, 2010
Pfeffer MA, Domanski M, Rosenberg Y,  et al.  Prevention of events with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition (the PEACE study design): prevention of Events with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition.  Am J Cardiol. 1998;82(3A):25H-30H
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kenchaiah S, Davis BR, Braunwald E,  et al; Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  Antecedent hypertension and the effect of captopril on the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes after acute myocardial infarction with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: insights from the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  Am Heart J. 2004;148(2):356-364
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moyé LA,  et al; SAVE Investigators.  Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: results of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):669-677
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Arima H, Chalmers J, Woodward M,  et al; PROGRESS Collaborative Group.  Lower target blood pressures are safe and effective for the prevention of recurrent stroke: the PROGRESS trial.  J Hypertens. 2006;24(6):1201-1208
PubMed   |  Link to Article
PROGRESS Management Committee.  Blood pressure lowering for the secondary prevention of stroke: rationale and design for PROGRESS.  J Hypertens Suppl. 1996;14:(2)  S41-S45
PubMed
PROGRESS Collaborative Group.  Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack.  Lancet. 2001;358(9287):1033-1041
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J,  et al;  ADVANCE Collaborative Group.  Effects of a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide on macrovascular and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the ADVANCE trial): a randomised controlled trial.  Lancet. 2007;370(9590):829-840
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Rationale and design of the ADVANCE study: a randomised trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: PreterAx and DiamicroN modified-release Controlled evaluation.  J Hypertens Suppl. 2001;19(4):S21-S28
PubMed
Yusuf S, Diener HC, Sacco RL,  et al; PRoFESS Study Group.  Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events.  N Engl J Med. 2008;359(12):1225-1237
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Diener HC, Sacco R, Yusuf S.Steering Committee, PRoFESS Study Group.  Rationale, design and baseline data of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing two antithrombotic regimens (a fixed-dose combination of extended-release dipyridamole plus ASA with clopidogrel) and telmisartan versus placebo in patients with strokes: the Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes Trial (PRoFESS).  Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;23(5-6):368-380
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gomma AH, Fox KM. The EUROPA trial: design, baseline demography and status of the substudies.  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2001;15(2):169-179
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fox KM.EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease Investigators.  Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study).  Lancet. 2003;362(9386):782-788
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu L, Wang Z, Gong L,  et al.  Blood pressure reduction for the secondary prevention of stroke: a Chinese trial and a systematic review of the literature.  Hypertens Res. 2009;32(11):1032-1040
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yusuf S. Unresolved issues in the management of hypertension.  Hypertension. 2010;55(4):832-834
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pimenta E, Oparil S.Medscape.  Prehypertension: epidemiology, consequences and treatment.  Nat Rev Nephrol. 2010;6(1):21-30
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Papadopoulos DP, Makris TK, Papademetriou V. Is it time to treat prehypertension?  Hypertens Res. 2008;31(9):1681-1686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Egan BM, Julius S. Prehypertension: risk stratification and management considerations.  Curr Hypertens Rep. 2008;10(5):359-366
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McInnes GT. Drug treatment of prehypertension: not now, not ever?  Blood Press. 2009;18(6):304-307
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kiely AE, Kwatra SG, Kwatra MM. Treating prehypertension: medically sound and economically viable.  Blood Press. 2009;18(6):300-303
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mitka M. Experts ponder treating prehypertension.  JAMA. 2006;295(18):2125-2126
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP,  et al; ACCORD Study Group.  Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.  N Engl J Med. 2010;362(17):1575-1585
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lüders S, Schrader J, Berger J,  et al; PHARAO Study Group.  The PHARAO study: prevention of hypertension with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril in patients with high-normal blood pressure: a prospective, randomized, controlled prevention trial of the German Hypertension League.  J Hypertens. 2008;26(7):1487-1496
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Julius S, Nesbitt SD, Egan BM,  et al; Trial of Preventing Hypertension (TROPHY) Study Investigators.  Feasibility of treating prehypertension with an angiotensin-receptor blocker.  N Engl J Med. 2006;354(16):1685-1697
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1. Selection Process for Studies Included in the Meta-analysis.
Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2. Pooled Relative Risks and Absolute Risk Reductions for Fatal or Nonfatal Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and Congestive Heart Failure and Composite Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes
Graphic Jump Location

CI indicates confidence interval; CVD, cardiovascular disease; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported. Sizes of data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis. For expansions of study names, see Table 1 footnote.
aNumber of events could not be calculated from information provided.
bNumber of events was estimated from information provided.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3. Pooled Relative Risks and Absolute Risk Reductions for Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality
Graphic Jump Location

CI indicates confidence interval; CVD, cardiovascular disease; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported. Sizes of data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis. For expansions of study names, see Table 1 footnote.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Characteristics of Randomized Clinical Trials of Antihypertensive Medications Included in the Meta-analysis (N = 25)a
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Baseline Characteristics of Participants Without Hypertension in Randomized Controlled Trials of Antihypertension Medications

References

Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990-2020: Global Burden of Disease Study.  Lancet. 1997;349(9064):1498-1504
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R.Prospective Studies Collaboration.  Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies.  Lancet. 2002;360(9349):1903-1913
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR,  et al; Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee.  Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.  Hypertension. 2003;42(6):1206-1252
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lawes CM, Vander Hoorn S, Rodgers A.International Society of Hypertension.  Global burden of blood-pressure-related disease, 2001.  Lancet. 2008;371(9623):1513-1518
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Greenlund KJ, Croft JB, Mensah GA. Prevalence of heart disease and stroke risk factors in persons with prehypertension in the United States, 1999-2000.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(19):2113-2118
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, Kannel WB, Levy D. Assessment of frequency of progression to hypertension in non-hypertensive participants in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort study.  Lancet. 2001;358(9294):1682-1686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vasan RS, Beiser A, Seshadri S,  et al.  Residual lifetime risk for developing hypertension in middle-aged women and men: the Framingham Heart Study.  JAMA. 2002;287(8):1003-1010
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang Y, Wang QJ. The prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension among US adults according to the new Joint National Committee guidelines: new challenges of the old problem.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(19):2126-2134
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Choi KM, Park HS, Han JH,  et al.  Prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension in a Korean population: Korean National Health and Nutrition Survey 2001.  J Hypertens. 2006;24(8):1515-1521
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gu D, Reynolds K, Wu X,  et al; InterASIA Collaborative Group. The International Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease in ASIA.  Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in China.  Hypertension. 2002;40(6):920-927
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Whelton PK, He J. Blood pressure reduction. In: Buring JE, Manson JE, Ridker PM, eds. Clinical Trials in Cardiovascular Disease. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2004:282-296
Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Libby P,  et al; CAMELOT Investigators.  Effect of antihypertensive agents on cardiovascular events in patients with coronary disease and normal blood pressure: the CAMELOT study: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2004;292(18):2217-2225
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Remme WJ, Deckers JW, Fox KM, Ferrari R, Bertrand M, Simoons ML.EUROPA Investigators.  Secondary prevention of coronary disease with ACE inhibition—does blood pressure reduction with perindopril explain the benefits in EUROPA?  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2009;23(2):161-170
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schrier RW, Estacio RO, Esler A, Mehler P. Effects of aggressive blood pressure control in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients on albuminuria, retinopathy and strokes.  Kidney Int. 2002;61(3):1086-1097
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yusuf S, Teo K, Anderson C,  et al; Telmisartan Randomised AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease (TRANSCEND) Investigators.  Effects of the angiotensin-receptor blocker telmisartan on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients intolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: a randomised controlled trial.  Lancet. 2008;372(9644):1174-1183
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verhagen AP, de Vet HCW, de Bie RA,  et al.  The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus.  J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(12):1235-1241
PubMed   |  Link to Article
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials.  Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177-188
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.  Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539-1558
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?  Psychol Methods. 2006;11(2):193-206
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias.  Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088-1101
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.  BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629-634
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol: a multicentre international study.  Br Med J. 1975;3(5986):735-740
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Baber NS, Evans DW, Howitt G,  et al.  Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Yugoslavia.  Br Heart J. 1980;44(1):96-100
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Beta-Blocker Heart Attack Trial Research Group.  A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction, I: mortality results.  JAMA. 1982;247(12):1707-1714
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Australian and Swedish Pindolol Study Group.  The effect of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction.  Eur Heart J. 1983;4(6):367-375
PubMed
Swedberg K, Held P, Kjekshus J, Rasmussen K, Rydén L, Wedel H. Effects of the early administration of enalapril on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the Cooperative New Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study II (CONSENSUS II).  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):678-684
PubMed   |  Link to Article
CONSENSUS Trial Study Group.  Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS).  N Engl J Med. 1987;316(23):1429-1435
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kostis JB. The effect of enalapril on mortal and morbid events in patients with hypertension and left ventricular dysfunction.  Am J Hypertens. 1995;8(9):909-914
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 1991;325(5):293-302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions.  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):685-691
PubMed   |  Link to Article
SOLVD Investigators.  Studies of left ventricular dysfunction (SOLVD)—rationale, design and methods: two trials that evaluate the effect of enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction.  Am J Cardiol. 1990;66(3):315-322
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Packer M, Bristow MR, Cohn JN,  et al; U.S. Carvedilol Heart Failure Study Group.  The effect of carvedilol on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 1996;334(21):1349-1355
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gustafsson F, Torp-Pedersen C, Køber L, Hildebrandt P.TRACE Study Group.  Effect of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition after acute myocardial infarction in patients with arterial hypertension.  J Hypertens. 1997;15(7):793-798L
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Køber L, Torp-Pedersen C, Carlsen JE,  et al; Trandolapril Cardiac Evaluation (TRACE) Study Group.  A clinical trial of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor trandolapril in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction.  N Engl J Med. 1995;333(25):1670-1676
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cleland JG, Erhardt L, Hall AS, Winter C, Ball SG. Validation of primary and secondary outcomes and classification of mode of death among patients with clinical evidence of heart failure after a myocardial infarction: a report from the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) Study Investigators.  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1993;22:(suppl 9)  S22-S27
PubMed
Spargias K, Ball S, Hall A. The prognostic significance of a history of systemic hypertension in patients randomised to either placebo or ramipril following acute myocardial infarction: evidence from the AIRE study.  J Hum Hypertens. 1999;13(8):511-516
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Borghi C, Bacchelli S, Esposti DD, Bignamini A, Magnani B, Ambrosioni E.SMILE Study Investigators.  Effects of the administration of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor during the acute phase of myocardial infarction in patients with arterial hypertension.  Am J Hypertens. 1999;12(7):665-672
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B. Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation (SMILE) study: rationale, design, organization, and outcome definitions.  Control Clin Trials. 1994;15(3):201-210
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B.Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation (SMILE) Study Investigators.  The effect of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor zofenopril on mortality and morbidity after anterior myocardial infarction.  N Engl J Med. 1995;332(2):80-85
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hjalmarson A, Goldstein S, Fagerberg B,  et al; MERIT-HF Study Group.  Effects of controlled-release metoprolol on total mortality, hospitalizations, and well-being in patients with heart failure: the Metoprolol CR/XL Randomized Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF).  JAMA. 2000;283(10):1295-1302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu L.Chinese Cardiac Study (CCS-I) Collaborative Group.  Long-term mortality in patients with myocardial infarction: impact of early treatment with captopril for 4 weeks.  Chin Med J (Engl). 2001;114(2):115-118
PubMed
Chinese Cardiac Study (CCS-1) Collaborative Group.  Oral captopril versus placebo among 14,962 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial.  Chin Med J (Engl). 1997;110(11):834-838
PubMed
Sleight P, Yusuf S, Pogue J, Tsuyuki R, Diaz R, Probstfield J.Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study.  Blood-pressure reduction and cardiovascular risk in HOPE study.  Lancet. 2001;358(9299):2130-2131
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.  Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy.  Lancet. 2000;355(9200):253-259
PubMed   |  Link to Article
HOPE Study Investigators.  The HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) study: the design of a large, simple randomized trial of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ramipril) and vitamin E in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events.  Can J Cardiol. 1996;12(2):127-137
PubMed
Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, Bosch J, Davies R, Dagenais G.The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.  N Engl J Med. 2000;342(3):145-153
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Estacio RO, Savage S, Nagel NJ, Schrier RW. Baseline characteristics of participants in the Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes trial.  Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(3):242-257
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rouleau JL, Roecker EB, Tendera M,  et al; Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival Study Group.  Influence of pretreatment systolic blood pressure on the effect of carvedilol in patients with severe chronic heart failure: the Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival (COPERNICUS) study.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(8):1423-1429
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Packer M, Coats AJS, Fowler MB,  et al; Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival Study Group.  Effect of carvedilol on survival in severe chronic heart failure.  N Engl J Med. 2001;344(22):1651-1658
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Marre M, Lievre M, Chatellier G, Mann JF, Passa P, Ménard J.DIABHYCAR Study Investigators.  Effects of low dose ramipril on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and raised excretion of urinary albumin: randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial (the DIABHYCAR study).  BMJ. 2004;328(7438):495
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Braunwald E, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE,  et al; PEACE Trial Investigators.  Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease.  N Engl J Med. 2004;351(20):2058-2068
PubMed   |  Link to Article
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center.  PEACE study formal data request 383. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Web site. https://biolincc.nhlbi.nih.gov/login/?next=/requests/data-formal-request/383/. 2010. Accessed July 21, 2010
Pfeffer MA, Domanski M, Rosenberg Y,  et al.  Prevention of events with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition (the PEACE study design): prevention of Events with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition.  Am J Cardiol. 1998;82(3A):25H-30H
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kenchaiah S, Davis BR, Braunwald E,  et al; Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  Antecedent hypertension and the effect of captopril on the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes after acute myocardial infarction with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: insights from the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  Am Heart J. 2004;148(2):356-364
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moyé LA,  et al; SAVE Investigators.  Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: results of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Trial.  N Engl J Med. 1992;327(10):669-677
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Arima H, Chalmers J, Woodward M,  et al; PROGRESS Collaborative Group.  Lower target blood pressures are safe and effective for the prevention of recurrent stroke: the PROGRESS trial.  J Hypertens. 2006;24(6):1201-1208
PubMed   |  Link to Article
PROGRESS Management Committee.  Blood pressure lowering for the secondary prevention of stroke: rationale and design for PROGRESS.  J Hypertens Suppl. 1996;14:(2)  S41-S45
PubMed
PROGRESS Collaborative Group.  Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack.  Lancet. 2001;358(9287):1033-1041
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J,  et al;  ADVANCE Collaborative Group.  Effects of a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide on macrovascular and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the ADVANCE trial): a randomised controlled trial.  Lancet. 2007;370(9590):829-840
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Rationale and design of the ADVANCE study: a randomised trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: PreterAx and DiamicroN modified-release Controlled evaluation.  J Hypertens Suppl. 2001;19(4):S21-S28
PubMed
Yusuf S, Diener HC, Sacco RL,  et al; PRoFESS Study Group.  Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events.  N Engl J Med. 2008;359(12):1225-1237
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Diener HC, Sacco R, Yusuf S.Steering Committee, PRoFESS Study Group.  Rationale, design and baseline data of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing two antithrombotic regimens (a fixed-dose combination of extended-release dipyridamole plus ASA with clopidogrel) and telmisartan versus placebo in patients with strokes: the Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes Trial (PRoFESS).  Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;23(5-6):368-380
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gomma AH, Fox KM. The EUROPA trial: design, baseline demography and status of the substudies.  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2001;15(2):169-179
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fox KM.EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease Investigators.  Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study).  Lancet. 2003;362(9386):782-788
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu L, Wang Z, Gong L,  et al.  Blood pressure reduction for the secondary prevention of stroke: a Chinese trial and a systematic review of the literature.  Hypertens Res. 2009;32(11):1032-1040
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yusuf S. Unresolved issues in the management of hypertension.  Hypertension. 2010;55(4):832-834
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pimenta E, Oparil S.Medscape.  Prehypertension: epidemiology, consequences and treatment.  Nat Rev Nephrol. 2010;6(1):21-30
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Papadopoulos DP, Makris TK, Papademetriou V. Is it time to treat prehypertension?  Hypertens Res. 2008;31(9):1681-1686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Egan BM, Julius S. Prehypertension: risk stratification and management considerations.  Curr Hypertens Rep. 2008;10(5):359-366
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McInnes GT. Drug treatment of prehypertension: not now, not ever?  Blood Press. 2009;18(6):304-307
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kiely AE, Kwatra SG, Kwatra MM. Treating prehypertension: medically sound and economically viable.  Blood Press. 2009;18(6):300-303
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mitka M. Experts ponder treating prehypertension.  JAMA. 2006;295(18):2125-2126
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP,  et al; ACCORD Study Group.  Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.  N Engl J Med. 2010;362(17):1575-1585
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lüders S, Schrader J, Berger J,  et al; PHARAO Study Group.  The PHARAO study: prevention of hypertension with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril in patients with high-normal blood pressure: a prospective, randomized, controlled prevention trial of the German Hypertension League.  J Hypertens. 2008;26(7):1487-1496
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Julius S, Nesbitt SD, Egan BM,  et al; Trial of Preventing Hypertension (TROPHY) Study Investigators.  Feasibility of treating prehypertension with an angiotensin-receptor blocker.  N Engl J Med. 2006;354(16):1685-1697
PubMed   |  Link to Article
CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Data Supplements
Supplemental Content

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 55

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Related Multimedia

Author in the Room

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles