SynthesisJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2010
A systematic review and meta-analysis of telmisartan versus valsartan in the management of essential hypertension.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telmisartan-based monotherapy and combination regimens for blood pressure control in adults with hypertension: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and GRADE assessment.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Pooled it
- A Single-Center, Open-Label, 3-Way Crossover Trial to Determine the Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Interaction Between Nebivolol and Valsartan in Healthy Volunteers at Steady State.American journal of therapeuticsTrial
- Comparison of effects of telmisartan versus valsartan on post-induction hypotension during noncardiac surgery: a prospective observational study.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2024Observational
- Telmisartan alleviates collagen type III glomerulopathy: A case report with literature review.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers in Patients With Hypertension in Japan - Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Circulation reports · 2020Article
- Scaling up effective treatment of hypertension-A pathfinder for universal health coverage.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Article
- Management of Hypertension Using Olmesartan Alone or in Combination.Cardiology and therapy · 2017Review
- Long-term safety and efficacy of telmisartan/amlodipine single pill combination in the treatment of hypertension.Vascular health and risk management · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This was a systematic assessment of the efficacy and safety of telmisartan and valsartan for the management of blood pressure (BP) in patients with essential hypertension. The authors reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing telmisartan and valsartan for the management of essential hypertension in which the participants were followed for at least 6 weeks. When a metaanalysis was possible, included studies were analyzed by Review Manager 5.0 provided by Cochrane Collaboration Group. Statistics were calculated as weight mean differences (WMDs) and relative risk with a random-effect model. A total of 6 RCTs with 3762 patients were included in this metaanalysis. When the authors combined data from all treatment categories as a group, no difference was found between telmisartan and valsartan in reduction of systolic BP and diastolic BP. In subgroup analysis, telmisartan showed a significant benefit on lowering systolic BP and diastolic BP (WMD, -2.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.03 to -0.73; P<0.01; and WMD,-1.73; 95% CI, -2.47 to -0.98; P<0.01; respectively). It was found that telmisartan had a higher rate of management of clinical BP compared with valsartan (relative risk, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.19; P=0.05). No difference was found in the incidence of adverse events. Telmisartan's BP-lowering capabilities were comparable to those of valsartan in monotherapy. When combined with hydrochlorothiazide, telmisartan was more effective than valsartan. Telmisartan had the same safety in the treatment of essential hypertensive patients in comparison with valsartan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.