ReviewJournal of human hypertension2018
Antihypertensive therapy in acute ischemic stroke: where do we stand?
Review in Journal of human hypertension, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for predicting unfavorable functional outcomes in ischemic stroke patients after acute phase.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Machine Learning Techniques in Blood Pressure Management During the Acute Phase of Ischemic Stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Biomarkers levels and brachial and central blood pressure during the subacute phase of lacunar stroke and other ischemic stroke subtypes.Journal of human hypertension · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the proven benefits of strict blood pressure (BP) control on primary and secondary prevention of stroke, management of acute hypertensive response in the early post-stroke period is surrounded by substantial controversy. Observational studies showed that raised BP on ischemic stroke onset is prognostically associated with excess risk for early adverse events and mortality. By contrast, randomized controlled trials and recent meta-analyses showed that although antihypertensive therapy effectively controls elevated BP in the acute stage of ischemic stroke, this BP-lowering effect is not translated into improvement in the risk of death or dependency. On this basis, acute and aggressive BP responses within 24 h of stroke onset should be avoided and antihypertensive therapy is recommended only for patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke and BP > 220/120 mmHg or those with BP > 185/110 mmHg who are eligible for therapy with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator. By contrast, recent clinical trials showed that intensive BP lowering to levels < 140 mmHg for systolic BP is safe and lowers the risk of hematoma expansion in patients with acute intra-cerebral hemorrhage and this BP target is recommended by current international guidelines. Herein, we provide an overview of randomized trials and recent meta-analyses on the management of hypertension during the acute stage of ischemic stroke. We discuss several areas of uncertainty and conclude with perspectives for future research.
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.