SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2025
Blood pressure variability and its utility in acute disease and critical illness: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBlood pressure variability (BPV) reflects the function of the autonomic nervous system (ANS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the relationship between BPV and outcomes in acute disease and critical illness.
methodsA systematic search was conducted across PubMed and Google Scholar. Data were extracted from included studies and analysed using Stata 15. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide were used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted to explore heterogeneity across studies.
resultsThe systematic review yielded 38 articles, 13 of which (comprising 21,475 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that per a 1-unit increase in BPV, the total OR (95% CI) value for non-mortality outcomes was 1.06 (1.04, 1.07), OR (95% CI) of standard deviation of systolic blood pressure variability (SBPV SD), coefficient of variation of SBPV (SBPV CV), successive variation of SBPV (SBPV SV), and SD of diastolic blood pressure variability (DBPV SD) were 1.04 (1.04, 1.09), 1.06 (1.02, 1.09), 1.04 (1.02, 1.07), and 1.17 (1.06, 1.28), respectively. SBPV SD was correlated with non-mortality outcomes (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.09), with ORs 1.09 (95% CI 1.05-1.13) in the serious infection cohorts and 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08) in the stroke cohort.
conclusionsThe evidence suggests a modest correlation between BPV and non-mortality outcomes in acute disease and critical illness. At the same time, BPV requires further validation as a potential predictive tool in emergency and intensive care settings. Certain BPV metrics, such as SBPV SD, appear more applicable to specific conditions, including stroke and severe infection. Further research is needed to determine whether modulating BPV translates into clinical benefits.
trial registrationThis study was registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) with the registration number CRD42024593808 in Autumn 2024.
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.