Treating the Diabetic Hypertensive: Consensus and Differences

A. Rahman
{"title":"Treating the Diabetic Hypertensive: Consensus and Differences","authors":"A. Rahman","doi":"10.33590/emjnephrol/10314843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hypertension and diabetes commonly coexist. Both are major modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. There has been a substantial shift in the recommendations of several expert committees on the management of hypertension in diabetics. It was once unanimously agreed by almost all major guidelines that the threshold for initiating diabetic patients with antihypertensive therapy is when blood pressure is >130/80 mmHg. The blood pressure target for treatment was also unanimously agreed to be <130/80 mmHg. These recommendations were, however, based on expert opinions and not on findings from major randomised controlled trials.\n\nSince then, there have been several randomised controlled trials looking at blood pressure-lowering in the diabetic population. These include the ADVANCE and ACCORD, and a subanalysis of the INVEST trials. Together with the earlier UKPDS and HOT trials, one would expect there to be more agreement in the most recent recommendations, but in fact the opposite is the case. There are now two different systolic targets (<130 mmHg and <140 mmHg) and three different diastolic targets (<90 mmHg, 85 mmHg, and <80 mmHg). The reason for this involves the choice of trials included in the recommendation, and the interpretation of results from these trials by various guideline committees.\n\nThe recommendation for diabetic hypertensives will be more consistent if future trials begin by asking a relevant research question that has not yet been answered: does treating diabetics with different thresholds of blood pressure levels impact on clinical outcomes? The trial must not only determine a primary research question, but it must also be adequately powered to answer it. Only when this question is answered should the next questions be asked. Does it matter how blood pressure is lowered? And are some drugs better than others? In the meantime, guideline committees should try to narrow the gap in recommendations, particularly if the guidelines originate from the same country or region.","PeriodicalId":348431,"journal":{"name":"EMJ Nephrology","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EMJ Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33590/emjnephrol/10314843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hypertension and diabetes commonly coexist. Both are major modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. There has been a substantial shift in the recommendations of several expert committees on the management of hypertension in diabetics. It was once unanimously agreed by almost all major guidelines that the threshold for initiating diabetic patients with antihypertensive therapy is when blood pressure is >130/80 mmHg. The blood pressure target for treatment was also unanimously agreed to be <130/80 mmHg. These recommendations were, however, based on expert opinions and not on findings from major randomised controlled trials. Since then, there have been several randomised controlled trials looking at blood pressure-lowering in the diabetic population. These include the ADVANCE and ACCORD, and a subanalysis of the INVEST trials. Together with the earlier UKPDS and HOT trials, one would expect there to be more agreement in the most recent recommendations, but in fact the opposite is the case. There are now two different systolic targets (<130 mmHg and <140 mmHg) and three different diastolic targets (<90 mmHg, 85 mmHg, and <80 mmHg). The reason for this involves the choice of trials included in the recommendation, and the interpretation of results from these trials by various guideline committees. The recommendation for diabetic hypertensives will be more consistent if future trials begin by asking a relevant research question that has not yet been answered: does treating diabetics with different thresholds of blood pressure levels impact on clinical outcomes? The trial must not only determine a primary research question, but it must also be adequately powered to answer it. Only when this question is answered should the next questions be asked. Does it matter how blood pressure is lowered? And are some drugs better than others? In the meantime, guideline committees should try to narrow the gap in recommendations, particularly if the guidelines originate from the same country or region.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗糖尿病高血压:共识与差异
高血压和糖尿病通常并存。两者都是心血管疾病可改变的主要危险因素。几个专家委员会关于糖尿病患者高血压管理的建议有了实质性的转变。几乎所有主要指南曾经一致同意,糖尿病患者开始抗高血压治疗的阈值是血压>130/80 mmHg。治疗的血压目标也一致同意<130/80 mmHg。然而,这些建议是基于专家意见,而不是基于主要随机对照试验的结果。从那以后,有几项随机对照试验着眼于糖尿病人群的血压降低。其中包括ADVANCE和ACCORD试验,以及INVEST试验的子分析。加上早期的UKPDS和HOT试验,人们会期望在最近的建议中有更多的一致意见,但事实上情况恰恰相反。现在有两个不同的收缩期目标(<130 mmHg和<140 mmHg)和三个不同的舒张期目标(<90 mmHg, 85 mmHg和<80 mmHg)。其原因涉及推荐中试验的选择,以及各指南委员会对这些试验结果的解释。如果未来的试验开始时提出一个尚未回答的相关研究问题:治疗不同血压水平阈值的糖尿病患者是否会影响临床结果,那么对糖尿病高血压的建议将更加一致?试验不仅要确定一个主要的研究问题,而且还必须有足够的动力来回答这个问题。只有回答了这个问题,才会提出下一个问题。如何降低血压有关系吗?有些药物比其他药物更好吗?与此同时,指南委员会应努力缩小建议的差距,特别是如果指南来自同一国家或地区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Influence of Potassium Intake on the Renoprotective Response to Sodium Restriction and Hydrochlorothiazide in Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy Interaction of General Obesity and Abdominal Obesity, and Frailty in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease ERA 2024 Interview: Jeroen de Baaij ERA 2024 Interview: Jasper Callemeyn ERA 2024 Interview: Peter Stenvinkel
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1