Observational studyIndian heart journal2018
Prevalence and real-world assessment of central aortic blood pressure in adult patients with essential hypertension uncontrolled on single anti-hypertensive agents.
Observational study in Indian heart journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brazilian Guidelines for In-office and Out-of-office Blood Pressure Measurement - 2023.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Guideline
- Noninvasive central hemodynamic monitoring in the primary care setting: improving prevention and management of cardiovascular diseases.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the prevalence of high central aortic pressure (CAP) in Indian patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension while on anti-hypertensive monotherapy. Also, to determine correlation between brachial blood pressure (BBP) and CAP, and ascertain if it is impacted by anti-hypertensive drug class and patients' age.
methodsIn this real-world, observational, prospective study, patients (30-70 years) with uncontrolled BBP (systolic BP [SBP] ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90 mmHg) were enrolled. Treatment was adjusted at Visit 1 (baseline), based on BBP and at treating physicians' discretion. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with uncontrolled central aortic SBP (>125 mmHg) at baseline. Secondary endpoints were comparison of BBP and CAP across drugs classes and age groups at baseline and Visit 2 (End-of-study, ∼8 weeks post-baseline), and proportion of patients with uncontrolled central SBP at end-of-study.
resultsOf 2030 patients screened, 1949 patients reported at baseline and 1740 patients completed end-of-study visit. Central SBP was >125 mmHg for 84.3% patients at baseline, and 48% patients at end-of-study. Interestingly, at end-of-study, 6.6% patients still had uncontrolled brachial SBP and controlled central SBP, while 13.6% patients had uncontrolled central SBP and controlled brachial SBP. At both visits, brachial SBP and central SBP showed positive correlation across most drug classes and age groups. At baseline, ACE inhibitors showed better efficacy than other drug classes. At end-of-study, BP control was better with fixed-dose combinations, though free-drug combinations were more frequently prescribed.
conclusionMeasurement of CAP along with BBP can be vital in management of hypertension. CTRI REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2015/10/006302.
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.