Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32851922›Full record

Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2020

Refractory Hypertension and Risks of Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in Patients With Resistant Hypertension: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Claudia R L Cardoso, Gil F Salles

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. An Update on Refractory Hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
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.

Claudia R L CardosoDepartment of Internal Medicine School of Medicine University Hospital Clementino Fraga Filho Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Brazil.
Gil F SallesDepartment of Internal Medicine School of Medicine University Hospital Clementino Fraga Filho Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The long-term prognosis of refractory hypertension (RfHT), defined as failure to control blood pressure (BP) levels despite an antihypertensive treatment with ≥5 medications including a diuretic and mineraloreceptor antagonist, has never been evaluated. Methods and Results In a prospective cohort study with 1576 patients with resistant hypertension, patients were classified as refractory or nonrefractory based on uncontrolled clinic (or office) and ambulatory BPs during the first 2 years of follow-up. Multivariate Cox analyses examined the associations between the diagnosis of RfHT and the occurrence of total cardiovascular events (CVEs), major adverse CVEs, and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, after adjustments for other risk factors. In total, 135 patients (8.6%) had RfHT by uncontrolled ambulatory BPs and 167 (10.6%) by uncontrolled clinic BPs. Over a median Follow-Up of 8.9 years, 338 total CVEs occurred (288 major adverse CVEs, including 124 myocardial infarctions, and 96 strokes), and 331 patients died, 196 from cardiovascular causes. The diagnosis of RfHT, using either classification by clinic or ambulatory BPs, was associated with significantly higher risks of major adverse CVEs, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke incidence, with hazard ratios varying from 1.54 to 2.14 in relation to patients with resistant nonrefractory hypertension; however, the classification based on ambulatory BPs was better in identifying higher risk patients than the classification based on clinic BP levels. Conclusions Patients with RfHT, particularly when defined by uncontrolled ambulatory BP levels, had higher risks of major adverse CVEs and mortality in relation to patients with resistant but nonrefractory hypertension, supporting the concept of refractory hypertension as a true extreme phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure.

Indexed as

AgedAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryBrazilCardiovascular DiseasesCohort StudiesFemaleHumansHypertensionIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePhenotypeAntihypertensive Agentsambulatory blood pressure monitoringcardiovascular eventscohort studymortalityrefractory hypertensionrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID32851922
PMCPMC7660786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.