UNASSIGNED: The risk implications of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) chronic kidney disease classification in older adults are controversial. We evaluated the risk of adverse outcomes in this population across categories of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR).
UNASSIGNED: Prospective cohort.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 2,509 participants aged ≥75 years in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).
UNASSIGNED: KDIGO eGFR and UACR categories. We combined KDIGO categories G1 and G2, G3b and G4, as well as A2 and A3.
UNASSIGNED: Primary SPRINT outcome (composite of myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes), and all-cause death.
UNASSIGNED: Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models.
UNASSIGNED: Mean age was 79.8 years, and 37.4% were female. The mean eGFR was 64.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, and the median UACR was 13.1 mg/g. In multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, compared with participants with eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and UACR < 30 mg/g, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of the primary outcome among participants with eGFR 45-59 or 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and UACR < 30 mg/g. However, those with eGFR 45-59 or 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and UACR ≥ 30 mg/g had higher risk of the primary outcome (HR [95% CI], 1.97 [1.27-3.04] and 3.32 [2.23-4.93], respectively). The risk for all-cause death was higher for each category of abnormal eGFR and UACR, with the highest risk observed among those with eGFR 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and UACR ≥ 30 mg/g (3.34 [2.05-5.44]).
UNASSIGNED: Individuals with diabetes and urine protein >1 g/day were excluded from SPRINT.
UNASSIGNED: Among older adults SPRINT participants, low eGFR without albuminuria was associated with higher mortality but not with increased risk of cardiovascular events. Additional studies are needed to evaluate an adapted chronic kidney disease stage-based risk stratification for older adults.
Using data from participants in the SPRINT trial, we evaluated the association of chronic kidney disease stage with adverse clinical outcomes among adults older than 75 years without diabetes. We found that low level of kidney function determined by a low estimated glomerular filtration rate with moderately or severely increased urine albumin excretion was associated with increased risk for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. However, low estimated glomerular filtration rate with normal or mildly increased urinary albumin excretion was not consistently associated with these adverse outcomes. This finding supports the need for additional studies to evaluate an age-adapted classification of chronic kidney disease to improve risk stratification among older adults.

In the original SPRINT article, age was categorized at 75 years, which was contrary to many previous clinical trials which is at 60 years.
The SPRINT trial randomized 9,361 hypertensive patients to a target blood pressure of <120 vs. <140 mm Hg (intensive vs. standard treatment, respectively). Age was re-categorized as <60 and ≥60 years and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for outcomes and adverse events.
Intensive treatment reduced primary outcome significantly in both <60 and ≥60 years of age subgroups with a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 36% and 22%, respectively, and HR of 0.58 [95% CI, 0.36-0.94] and 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93], respectively. Although the intensive treatment rendered no effect on myocardial infarction (MI) in the overall comparison, it significantly reduced MI in patients <60 years of age with an RRR of 58% and HR of 0.39 [95% CI, 0.17-0.91]. In the ≥60-year age subgroup, reduced heart failure incidence was noted after intensive treatment, including death from other cardiovascular causes; however, these were not observed in the <60-year age subgroup. Intensive treatment resulted in significant hypotension, syncope, acute renal failure, or acute kidney injury in the ≥60-year age group; conversely, the risk of these adverse effects in patients <60 years of age did not increase.
Intensive blood pressure control is beneficial for elderly patients (age ≥60 years), albeit with increased risk of adverse events.

UNASSIGNED: The risks associated with non-albuminuric chronic kidney disease (CKD) have been investigated in diabetes mellitus but not in hypertensive patients. The objective of this study was to investigate the risks associated with non-albuminuric CKD in treated hypertensive patients in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) population.
UNASSIGNED: Based on baseline albuminuria status (urine albumin/creatinine ratio [UACR], ≥30 or <30 mg/g) and the levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate ([eGFR], ≥60, 45-59, or <45 mL/min/1.73 m2), participants were classified into six subgroups to assess the risks associated with the primary outcome and mortality. The primary composite outcome was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or mortality from cardiovascular causes.
UNASSIGNED: During a median follow-up of 3.26 years in 8,866 hypertensive patients, there were 352 deaths and 547 participants with the primary outcome. In adjusted Cox regression analysis using non-CKD and non-albuminuria (eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 combined with UACR <30 mg/g) as reference, albuminuria whether combined with CKD or not, showed significantly higher risk of both primary outcome and all-cause mortality in the total population. Whereas, non-albuminuria only combined with eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 showed significantly higher risk of both primary outcome and all-cause mortality in the intensive-therapy group.
UNASSIGNED: Non-albuminuric CKD did have higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality only if the eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2. Increased albuminuria conferred higher risk of primary outcome and all-cause mortality irrespective the levels of eGFR.
UNASSIGNED: ClinicalTrials.gov, number: NCT01206062.

Background: The guidelines recommend intensive blood pressure control. Randomized trials have focused on the relevance of the systolic blood pressure (SBP) lowering, leaving the safety of the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) reduction unresolved. There are data available which show that low DBP should not stop clinicians from achieving SBP targets; however, registries and analyses of randomized trials present conflicting results. The purpose of the study was to apply machine learning (ML) algorithms to determine, whether DBP is an important risk factor to predict stroke, heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), and primary outcome in the SPRINT trial database. Methods: ML experiments were performed using decision tree, random forest, k-nearest neighbor, naive Bayesian, multi-layer perceptron, and logistic regression algorithms, including and excluding DBP as the risk factor in an unselected and selected (DBP < 70 mmHg) study population. Results: Including DBP as the risk factor did not change the performance of the machine learning models evaluated using accuracy, AUC, mean, and weighted F-measure, and was not required to make proper predictions of stroke, MI, HF, and primary outcome. Conclusions: Analyses of the SPRINT trial data using ML algorithms imply that DBP should not be treated as an independent risk factor when intensifying blood pressure control.

Although hypertension is highly prevalent in older adults, treatment goals require both an understanding of the various guidelines available, as well as appreciation of the unique medical, cognitive, psychosocial, and functional heterogeneity of our individual geriatric patients that may place them outside those guidelines. As a patient\'s clinical status changes over time, clinicians may consider deprescribing their blood pressure medications when their risks begin to outweigh their benefits. Unique clinical circumstances and incorporating the time to benefit of hypertension control help guide clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure (BP) treatment in patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) over their lifetime in Saudi Arabia.
METHODS: A Markov model was developed for the BP strategies to estimate the added lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. These 2 items were then used to develop an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Event rates were estimated from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial, and the other model inputs were retrieved from previous studies. Estimated costs were collected from 5 private hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The model used a lifetime framework adopting healthcare payer in Saudi Arabia. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate the robustness and uncertainty of the estimates.
RESULTS: Over a 30-year period, intensive BP therapy would be cost-effective compared with the standard treatment with incremental costs per QALY, in US dollars, of $24 056. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested intensive BP treatment would be cost-effective compared with standard treatment 86.7% of the time at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $$60 000 per QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: The result of this study showed that intensive BP treatment appears to be a cost-effective choice for patients with a high risk of CVD in Saudi Arabia when compared with standard treatment.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial-CKD substudy (SPRINT-CKD) has suggested a lower blood pressure (BP) target in CKD patients. However, it is questionable whether the SPRINT-CKD results may be generalized to CKD patients under nephrology care.
METHODS: To compare SPRINT-CKD cohort versus referred CKD patients in terms of patients\' risk profile and outcomes, we pooled four prospective cohorts of consecutive CKD patients referred to 40 Italian renal clinics. We implemented the same inclusion/exclusion criteria adopted in SPRINT and same endpoints: (1) a composite of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular (CV) events (2) all-cause mortality and (3) ESRD (composite of chronic dialysis, transplantation or 50% eGFR decline). Findings were compared with those attained in the control arm of SPRINT-CKD trial that mirrored standard BP management in clinical practice.
RESULTS: Out of 2847 patients referred to renal clinics, only 20.1% (n = 571) were identified as eligible for SPRINT-CKD. Age (72 ± 9 years), gender (42.2% female) and systolic BP (142 ± 10 mmHg) did not differ from the SPRINT-CKD while referred patients had a worse risk profile at baseline: larger prevalence of prior CV disease (25.7% versus 19.5%), higher Framingham risk score (31.9 ± 14.6% versus 27.2 ± 24.7%) and lower GFR (38 ± 11 versus 48 ± 10 mL/min/1.73 m2). During 4.0 years of follow-up, 86 CV events (50 fatal), 78 all-cause death and 59 ESRD occurred with annual incidence rates higher than those observed in the SPRINT-CKD control group (CV events 4.18 vs 3.19; all-cause death 3.64 vs 2.21; ESRD 2.80 vs 0.41%/year).
CONCLUSIONS: The SPRINT-CKD cohort is poorly representative of the CKD population under nephrology care, thus suggesting that conclusions may not apply to patients referred to nephrologist.

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial demonstrated significant decreases in cardiovascular events and total mortality with intensive systolic blood pressure lowering in adults with high cardiovascular risk in the absence of diabetes but benefits were accompanied by increased risk of adverse events.
Over 100,000 deaths and 46,000 cases of heart failure may be prevented annually if intensive systolic blood pressure lowering is implemented in 17 million US adults who are age 50 years and older, and have high cardiovascular risk in the absence of diabetes and meet eligibility for the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial. However, the benefits of intensive SBP lowering will be accompanied by an excess of 43,000 cases of electrolyte abnormalities and 88,000 cases of acute kidney injury. Physicians should consider implementation of intensive systolic blood pressure lowering in appropriate patients who understand the risks and benefits of this intervention.