ReviewCureus2023
Antihypertensive Interventions in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Evaluating Clinical Outcomes Through an Emergency Medicine Paradigm.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood Pressure Reduction Time Windows in Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Prehospital blood pressure lowering in patients with ultra-acute presumed stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Early Versus Delayed Antihypertensive Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2026Article
- Elevated TyG-BMI significantly increases the 1-year stroke recurrence risk in patients with acute ischemic stroke and hypertension.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High blood pressure (HBP) is usually prominent after the onset of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Although previous studies have found that about half of patients with AIS have a background of hypertension, there is no clear etiology for HBP in AIS. The literature reveals discrepancies in the relationship between HBP and clinical outcomes of AIS, pointing toward the contested effect of blood pressure (BP) reduction clinical outcomes. Thus, the potential benefits and hazards of HBP treatment were explored in the context of clinical outcomes after AIS. An electronic database and a manual search were carried out to identify all the articles related to this topic and published between 2000 and January 2023. The Review Manager software was also used to perform the meta-analysis and quality appraisal. In analyses related to patients not treated with reperfusion therapies, mortality, and dependency outcomes were categorized as short-term (<3 months) or long-term (≥3 months). Our search strategy yielded 2459 articles, of which only 15 met the inclusion criteria. The results of our meta-analysis demonstrate that in patients not treated with reperfusion therapies, BP lowering had no significant impact on either short-term or long-term mortality (risk ratio (RR): 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-1.73; p = 0.39, and RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.77-1.40; p = 0.81, respectively) and dependency (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.97-1.30; p = 0.11, and RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.90-1.07; p = 0.61, respectively). Furthermore, BP lowering prior to reperfusion showed no significant effect on mortality (RR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.23-2.26; p = 0.58), but it did significantly reduce the risk of dependency (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.85-0.94; p < 0.00001). When the dataset was restricted to patients who had successful reperfusion, intensive BP lowering (target systolic BP <120 mmHg) was found to increase the risk of dependency (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.09-1.39; p = 0.0009). In addition, BP reduction had an insignificant effect on the risk of recurrent strokes and combined vascular events (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.54-1.84; p = 1.00, and RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.70-1.41; p = 0.95, respectively). Lowering BP in patients not treated with reperfusion therapies is not beneficial in reducing the risk of either short or long-term mortality and dependency. However, BPR before reperfusion reduces the risk of dependency, while aggressive BPR (target systolic blood pressure (SBP) <120 mmHg) after successful reperfusion increases the risk of dependency. Therefore, we recommend BPR as early as possible for patients undergoing reperfusion therapies but suggest against aggressive BPR in patients who have undergone successful reperfusion.
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.