ArticlePloS one2024
Orthostatic hypotension in stroke/TIA patients: Association with new events and the effect of the NAILED intervention.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updates in the 2025 AHA/ACC Hypertension Guideline.Current hypertension reports · 2026Review
- Very early tilt-table verticalization unmasks impaired cerebral autoregulation within 24 h after endovascular thrombectomy: a transcranial Doppler study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Outcomes of Orthostatic Hypotension in Hemorrhagic Stroke Patients During Hospitalization.Neurology international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFear of orthostatic hypotension (OH) and a reported association with an increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events may limit antihypertensive treatment after stroke/TIA. In the NAILED trial, systematic titration of antihypertensive treatment resulted in lower blood pressure (BP) and reduced the incidence of stroke. Our aim was to assess the association between OH and CV events or death in a stroke/TIA population and the association between group allocation in the NAILED trial and risk of OH during follow-up. METHODS AND
findingsThis post-hoc analysis included all patients with complete BP measurement at baseline in the NAILED trial (n = 814). OH was defined as a drop in systolic BP ≥20 or diastolic BP ≥10 mmHg 1 minute after standing from a seated position. The association between OH and a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death was assessed using an adjusted Cox regression model with OH as a time-varying variable. The association between group allocation (intervention vs. control) and OH was assessed using logistic regression. During a mean follow-up of 4.8 years, 35.3% of patients had OH at some point. OH was not significantly associated with the composite outcome (HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.80-1.54). Allocation to the intervention group in the NAILED trial was not associated with OH during follow-up (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.62-1.13).
conclusionsOH was not associated with an increased risk of CV events or death in this stroke/TIA population. Systematic titration of antihypertensive treatment did not increase the prevalence of OH compared to usual care. Thus, OH did not reduce the gains of antihypertensive treatment.
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.