ArticleHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2026
Comparative effectiveness and safety of oral antihypertensive agents for severe asymptomatic hypertension: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe asymptomatic hypertension is a common presentation in acute care, yet the optimal choice of oral antihypertensive therapy remains uncertain due to limited comparative evidence. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating oral antihypertensive agents in adults with severe asymptomatic hypertension. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL) were searched from inception to December 2025. The primary outcome was short-term treatment success, defined as a clinically meaningful reduction in blood pressure within 4 h. Random-effects models were used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and treatments were ranked using P-scores. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Five trials were included. All pharmacologic treatments reduced blood pressure in the short term. Compared with the remaining interventions, beta blockers (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.59-1.92), calcium channel blockers (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.59-1.78), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64-1.58) were associated with a higher likelihood of treatment success at 120-240 min, although these were not statistically significant. Both direct and indirect comparisons showed no significant differences among treatments. Ranking analyses suggested beta-blockers had the highest probability of effectiveness (P-score 0.63), but with substantial uncertainty. Adverse events were infrequently reported and generally mild. Overall certainty of evidence was very low. Oral antihypertensive agents lower blood pressure in the short term, but no single class demonstrates clear superiority, underscoring the need for individualized management and larger, high-quality comparative trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42642627What 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.