Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28497339›Full record

ArticleHigh blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension2017

Follow-up of Antihypertensive Therapy Improves Blood Pressure Control: Results of HYT (HYperTension survey) Follow-up.

F Fici, G Seravalle, N Koylan, I Nalbantgil, N Cagla, Y Korkut, F Quarti-Trevano, W Makel, G Grassi

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

F FiciClinica Medica, Università Milano Bicocca, via Pergolesi 33, Monza-Milan, 20052, Italy.
G SeravalleCardiology Department, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS S. Luca Hpt, Milan, Italy.
N KoylanAnadolu Saglik Merkezi, Istanbul, Turkey.
I NalbantgilDepartment of Cardiology, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.
N CaglaDüzen Labaratuvarları, Ankara, Turkey.
Y KorkutPrimary Care Department, Dumlupinar University, Kutahyta, Turkey.
F Quarti-TrevanoClinica Medica, Università Milano Bicocca, via Pergolesi 33, Monza-Milan, 20052, Italy.
W MakelClinical Research Facilities International B.V., Schaijk, The Netherlands.
G GrassiClinica Medica, Università Milano Bicocca, via Pergolesi 33, Monza-Milan, 20052, Italy. guido.grassi@unimib.it.
University of Milano-Bicocca · ITDumlupinar University · TREge University · TRGazi Hastanesi · TRIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITMultiMedica · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough improved during the past few years, blood pressure control remains sub optimal.

aimThe impact of follow-up assessment on blood pressure control was evaluated in a group of patients of the HYT (HYperTension survey), treated with a combination of different dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers (CCBs regimen) and inhibitors of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) and with uncontrolled blood pressure. This was obtained assessing (a) the rate of blood pressure control at 3 and 6 months of follow-up in the whole group of patients, (b) the rate of blood pressure control and the average blood pressure values in subjects treated with different DHP-CCBs regimen.

methodsFrom the 4993 patients with uncontrolled blood pressure, (BP ≥ 140/90 or ≥140/85 in patients with diabetes), 3729 (mean age 61.2 ± 11.5 years), maintained CCBs regimen combined wih RAAS blockers and were evaluated at 3 and 6 months follow-up. At each visit BP (semiautomatic device, Omron-M6, 3 measurements), heart rate, adverse events and treatment persistence were collected.

resultsAt 1st and 2nd follow-up the rate of controlled BP was 63.5 and 72.8% respectively (p < 0.05 vs 35.3% at baseline), whereas in diabetes was 32.5 and 37.9% respectively (p < 0.05 vs 20% at baseline). No differences in heart rate were observed. No differences in control rate were observed between the different CCBs regimen. The incidence of drugs related adverse events was 3.6%.

conclusionsThese findings provide evidence that: (a) the follow-up of hypertensive patients under therapy increase the rate of blood pressure control; (b) there is no significant difference in the antihypertensive effect between different CCBs regimen;

Indexed as

AgedAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCalcium Channel BlockersCross-Sectional StudiesDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsCalcium Channel BlockersACE-inhibitorsAngiotensin II receptors blockersAnkle edemaBlood pressure controlDihydropyridine calcium channel blockers

Identifiers

PMID28497339
OpenAlexW2613349237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.