ArticleVascular health and risk management2026
Hemodynamic-Guided Therapy is Associated with Better Hypertension Control Compared with Standard Care: A Comparative Clinical Analysis.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Blood pressure abnormalities are common in patients with heart-related conditions and substantially increase morbidity and mortality. This retrospective comparative study evaluated the value of a hemodynamic-guided therapy (HGT) intervention on systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP) compared with standard care. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 156 patients with cardiovascular disease (HGT, n = 107; control, n = 49). SBP and DBP were measured at baseline and after treatment using standardized noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring. Hemodynamic parameters (including cardiac output, systemic vascular resistance, and total body fluids were used to guide medication selection and titration in the HGT group. Normality of paired difference scores was assessed with the Shapiro-Wilk test, and within‑group comparisons were performed with paired t‑tests. Categorical comparisons used chi‑square tests. Statistical significance was set at two‑sided p < 0.05. Results: Post‑treatment assessments showed significant reductions in both SBP and DBP in the HGT group but not in the control group. Among women receiving HGT, the mean post‑treatment SBP was 133.8 mmHg (baseline to post-treatment change, p < 0.001); among men receiving HGT, the mean post‑treatment SBP was 131.6 mmHg versus 150.5 mmHg at baseline (p < 0.001). DBP in women receiving HGT decreased to a mean of 74.2 mmHg, and in men to 74.7 mmHg from 85.5 mmHg at baseline (both p < 0.001). No significant SBP or DBP changes were observed in the control arm. Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, hemodynamic‑guided therapy was associated with significant improvements in systolic and diastolic blood pressure compared with standard care. Using individualized hemodynamic profiles to guide medication selection and dosing may improve blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and cardiovascular comorbidities; prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
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.