ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2010
The optimal blood pressure target for patients with coronary artery disease.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Impact of blood pressure and medication adherence on clinical outcomes in patients with hypertension.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Effects ofBiomedical reports · 2017Article
- Considerations in Understanding the Coronary Blood Flow- Left Ventricular Mass Relationship in Patients with Hypertension.Current cardiology reviews · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
None of the available outcome-based studies was primarily designed to compare different blood pressure (BP) goals in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Consequently, there is uncertainty about the most appropriate BP treatment goal in these patients. Although US guidelines recommend a target less than 130/80 mm Hg, recent European guidelines state that such aggressive target is not consistently supported, therefore making the case for a less aggressive target (<140/90 mm Hg) in all hypertensive patients including those with CAD. A low systolic BP may be beneficial to limit myocardial workload, but an excessive lowering of diastolic BP might impair coronary perfusion, with potentially adverse effects (J-curve phenomenon). The optimal BP target for patients with CAD remains undefined. A reasonable target appears to be in the range of 130-140/80-90 mm Hg. Any further reduction may be safe, but not much productive from a prognostic standpoint.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20425161What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.