Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30218213›Full record

ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2018

SPRINT and the Kidney: What Have We Learned?

Racquel Wells, Mahboob Rahman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current hypertension reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Case reports: old-timers and evergreens.Journal of medical case reports · 2018
    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

2 authors.

Racquel WellsDepartment of Medicine, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Mahboob RahmanDepartment of Medicine, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. Mahboob.Rahman@uhhospitals.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo review the impact of the Systolic Blood Pressure Interventional Trial (SPRINT) on renal function and chronic kidney disease. RECENT

findingsHypertension is a risk factor for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The benefits of intensive blood pressure lowering in the CKD population in previous studies are unclear. The SPRINT compared standard (< 140 mmHg) and intensive (< 120 mmHg) blood pressure management in nondiabetic patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease. In the subgroup of patients with CKD, the most important finding was that intensive blood pressure lowering is associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. Other than lower levels of albuminuria, there was no benefit on clinical kidney outcomes with the intensive treatment group. The risk of incident CKD and episodes of acute kidney injury was higher in patients in the intensive treatment group, though most patients with acute kidney injury recovered kidney function. While the benefit of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular events and mortality with intensive blood pressure lowering is clear in patients with CKD, longer term follow-up may be needed to fully understand the effect on kidney function.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAlbuminuriaAntihypertensive AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesGlomerular Filtration RateHumansHypertensionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRenal Insufficiency, ChronicSystoleAntihypertensive AgentsAcute kidney injuryBlood pressure monitoringChronic kidney diseaseSPRINT

Identifiers

PMID30218213

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.