SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Blood pressure targets in adults with hypertension.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rationale for the Use of Fixed Combination Therapies with Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Beta-Blockers in Patients with Essential Hypertension and High Cardiovascular Risk: A Consensus Document from the Italian Society of Arterial Hypertension (Siia) and the Italian Society of Cardiovascular Prevention (SIPREC).High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026Guideline
- Diagnosis models to predict peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review and meta analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- The short and long-term efficacy of nurse-led interventions for improving blood pressure control in people with hypertension in primary care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC primary care · 2024Pooled it
- Blood pressure targets for the treatment of people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Optimal blood pressure target in patients with uncomplicated hypertension: a target trial emulation study.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Annual Trends in Risk Factor Control Status at the Time of Ischemic Stroke in South Korea.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Attrition and associated factors among patients on chronic antihypertensive therapy at Mulago hospital, Uganda: A mixed method study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Renal Safety of Telminuvo, a Single Pill Combination of Telmisartan and S-amlodipine, in Korean Hypertensive Patients: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study.Electrolyte & blood pressure : E & BP · 2025Article
- Blood pressure lowering efficacy of dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/glucagon-like peptide-1 (GIP/GLP-1) receptor agonists compared to glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Baseline and 7-Year longitudinal trajectories of systolic blood pressure and all-cause mortality in the elderly: A large prospective cohort study in China, 2017-2023.AIMS public health · 2025Article
- Review
- Lipoprotein(a) among normotensive patients and risk of incident hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2024Article
- Association of late-life blood pressure change with cerebral small vessel disease in the MIND-China study.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Update of the clinical guideline for hypertension diagnosis and treatment in Iran.Clinical hypertension · 2024Article
- Article
- First-line diuretics versus other classes of antihypertensive drugs for hypertension.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Article
- [Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2022 thematic updates. Working groups of the PAPPS].Atencion primaria · 2022Article
- Article
- 2022 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology and the Taiwan Hypertension Society for the Management of Hypertension.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis is the first update of this review first published in 2009. When treating elevated blood pressure, doctors usually try to achieve a blood pressure target. That target is the blood pressure value below which the optimal clinical benefit is supposedly obtained. "The lower the better" approach that guided the treatment of elevated blood pressure for many years was challenged during the last decade due to lack of evidence from randomised trials supporting that strategy. For that reason, the standard blood pressure target in clinical practice during the last years has been less than 140/90 mm Hg for the general population of patients with elevated blood pressure. However, new trials published in recent years have reintroduced the idea of trying to achieve lower blood pressure targets. Therefore, it is important to know whether the benefits outweigh harms when attempting to achieve targets lower than the standard target.
objectivesThe primary objective was to determine if lower blood pressure targets (any target less than or equal to 135/85 mm Hg) are associated with reduction in mortality and morbidity as compared with standard blood pressure targets (less than or equal to 140/ 90 mm Hg) for the treatment of patients with chronic arterial hypertension. The secondary objectives were: to determine if there is a change in mean achieved systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP associated with "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets" in patients with chronic arterial hypertension; and to determine if there is a change in withdrawals due to adverse events with "lower targets" as compared with "standard targets", in patients with elevated blood pressure. SEARCH
methodsThe Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to May 2019: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2019, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients allocated to lower or to standard blood pressure targets (see above). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JAA, VL) independently assessed the included trials and extracted data. Primary outcomes were total mortality; total serious adverse events; myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure, end stage renal disease, and other serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were achieved mean SBP and DBP, withdrawals due to adverse effects, and mean number of antihypertensive drugs used. We assessed the risk of bias of each trial using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsThis update includes 11 RCTs involving 38,688 participants with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years. This represents 7 new RCTs compared with the original version. At baseline the mean weighted age was 63.1 years and the mean weighted blood pressure was 155/91 mm Hg. Lower targets do not reduce total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.05; 11 trials, 38,688 participants; high-certainty evidence) and do not reduce total serious adverse events (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.08; 6 trials, 18,165 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that the benefits of lower targets do not outweigh the harms as compared to standard blood pressure targets. Lower targets may reduce myocardial infarction (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96; 6 trials, 18,938 participants, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.4%, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 250 over 3.7 years) and congestive heart failure (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.92; 5 trials, 15,859 participants, ARR 0.6%, NNTB 167 over 3.7 years) (low-certainty for both outcomes). Reduction in myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure was not reflected in total serious adverse events. This may be due to an increase in other serious adverse events (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.59; 6 trials. 18,938 participants, absolute risk increase (ARI) 3%, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 33 over four years) (low-certainty evidence). Participants assigned to a "lower" target received one additional antihypertensive medication and achieved a significantly lower mean SBP (122.8 mm Hg versus 135.0 mm Hg, and a lower mean DBP (82.0 mm Hg versus 85.2 mm Hg, than those assigned to "standard target". AUTHORS'
conclusionsFor the general population of persons with elevated blood pressure, the benefits of trying to achieve a lower blood pressure target rather than a standard target (≤ 140/90 mm Hg) do not outweigh the harms associated with that intervention. Further research is needed to see if some groups of patients would benefit or be harmed by lower targets. The results of this review are primarily applicable to older people with moderate to high cardiovascular risk. They may not be applicable to other populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.