More intensive versus conservative blood pressure lowering after endovascular therapy in stroke: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

IF 1.8 4区 医学
Blood Pressure Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-10 DOI:10.1080/08037051.2025.2475314
Ahmed Naji Mansoor, Vatsalya Choudhary, Zain Mohammad Nasser, Muskan Jain, Dhruvikumari Dayanand Sharma, Mateo Jaramillo Villegas, Sujaritha Janarthanam, Muhammad Ayyan, Simran Ravindra Nimal, Huzaifa Ahmad Cheema, Muhammad Ehsan, Muhammad Aemaz Ur Rehman, Abdulqadir Nashwan, Sourbha S Dani
{"title":"More intensive versus conservative blood pressure lowering after endovascular therapy in stroke: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.","authors":"Ahmed Naji Mansoor, Vatsalya Choudhary, Zain Mohammad Nasser, Muskan Jain, Dhruvikumari Dayanand Sharma, Mateo Jaramillo Villegas, Sujaritha Janarthanam, Muhammad Ayyan, Simran Ravindra Nimal, Huzaifa Ahmad Cheema, Muhammad Ehsan, Muhammad Aemaz Ur Rehman, Abdulqadir Nashwan, Sourbha S Dani","doi":"10.1080/08037051.2025.2475314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimum systolic blood pressure (BP) after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke is uncertain. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of more intensive BP management compared to less intensive BP management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched various electronic databases to retrieve relevant RCTs on the clinical effects of more intensive BP management after endovascular thrombectomy compared to the less intensive management. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our meta-analysis included four RCTs with a total of 1560 patients. More intensive BP management (<140 mmHg) was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the number of patients showing functional independence (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score = 0-2) at 90 days (OR 0.69; CI = 0.51-0.94). Regarding 90-day mortality, our pooled results showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (OR 1.21; CI = 0.89-1.65). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the incidence of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) (OR 1.09; CI = 0.85-1.39) and the incidence of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (sICH) (OR 1.11; CI = 0.75-1.65).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>According to our meta-analysis, the intensive BP lowering group decreased the number of patients showing functional independence at 90 days. We found no benefit of the intensive lowering of BP on mortality rates and incidence of ICH compared to the conservative BP management. Future large-scale trials should focus on other interventions to improve prognosis in these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":9000,"journal":{"name":"Blood Pressure","volume":" ","pages":"2475314"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood Pressure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08037051.2025.2475314","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The optimum systolic blood pressure (BP) after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke is uncertain. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of more intensive BP management compared to less intensive BP management.

Methods: We searched various electronic databases to retrieve relevant RCTs on the clinical effects of more intensive BP management after endovascular thrombectomy compared to the less intensive management. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes.

Results: Our meta-analysis included four RCTs with a total of 1560 patients. More intensive BP management (<140 mmHg) was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the number of patients showing functional independence (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score = 0-2) at 90 days (OR 0.69; CI = 0.51-0.94). Regarding 90-day mortality, our pooled results showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (OR 1.21; CI = 0.89-1.65). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the incidence of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) (OR 1.09; CI = 0.85-1.39) and the incidence of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (sICH) (OR 1.11; CI = 0.75-1.65).

Conclusion: According to our meta-analysis, the intensive BP lowering group decreased the number of patients showing functional independence at 90 days. We found no benefit of the intensive lowering of BP on mortality rates and incidence of ICH compared to the conservative BP management. Future large-scale trials should focus on other interventions to improve prognosis in these patients.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Blood Pressure
Blood Pressure Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: For outstanding coverage of the latest advances in hypertension research, turn to Blood Pressure, a primary source for authoritative and timely information on all aspects of hypertension research and management. Features include: • Physiology and pathophysiology of blood pressure regulation • Primary and secondary hypertension • Cerebrovascular and cardiovascular complications of hypertension • Detection, treatment and follow-up of hypertension • Non pharmacological and pharmacological management • Large outcome trials in hypertension.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信