确定主要心血管疾病事件和全因死亡率的最佳一级预防干预措施:随机对照试验的系统回顾和分层网络荟萃分析

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Olalekan A Uthman, Rachel Court, Jodie Enderby, Chidozie Nduka, Lena Al-Khudairy, Seun Anjorin, Hema Mistry, G J Melendez-Torres, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Aileen Clarke
{"title":"确定主要心血管疾病事件和全因死亡率的最佳一级预防干预措施:随机对照试验的系统回顾和分层网络荟萃分析","authors":"Olalekan A Uthman, Rachel Court, Jodie Enderby, Chidozie Nduka, Lena Al-Khudairy, Seun Anjorin, Hema Mistry, G J Melendez-Torres, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Aileen Clarke","doi":"10.3310/RLDH7432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiovascular disease accounts for substantial mortality and healthcare costs worldwide. Numerous interventions exist for primary prevention but lack head-to-head comparisons on long-term impacts.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the comparative effectiveness of interventions for primary cardiovascular disease prevention through network meta-analysis of randomised trials.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference abstracts and trial registries from inception to March 2021.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Randomised controlled trials of pharmacologic therapies, nutritional supplements, lifestyle changes, behavioural approaches and health policies with at least 6 months' follow-up were included. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease events, coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 139 randomised trials, including 1,053,772 participants, proved suitable for quantitative synthesis. Blood pressure-lowering medications (risk ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.94), tight blood pressure control (risk ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96), statins (risk ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.91) and multifactorial lifestyle interventions (risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.92) reduced composite cardiovascular events and mortality.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Residual confounding may exist. Few direct head-to-head comparisons limited differentiation between some specific modalities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found evidence that blood pressure treatments, intense blood pressure targets, statins when appropriate and multifactorial lifestyle changes are the most effective strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, with unclear effects from other interventions. These findings can inform clinical guidelines and health policies prioritising interventions.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This research article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/148/05.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-65"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying optimal primary prevention interventions for major cardiovascular disease events and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and hierarchical network meta-analysis of RCTs.\",\"authors\":\"Olalekan A Uthman, Rachel Court, Jodie Enderby, Chidozie Nduka, Lena Al-Khudairy, Seun Anjorin, Hema Mistry, G J Melendez-Torres, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Aileen Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/RLDH7432\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiovascular disease accounts for substantial mortality and healthcare costs worldwide. Numerous interventions exist for primary prevention but lack head-to-head comparisons on long-term impacts.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the comparative effectiveness of interventions for primary cardiovascular disease prevention through network meta-analysis of randomised trials.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference abstracts and trial registries from inception to March 2021.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Randomised controlled trials of pharmacologic therapies, nutritional supplements, lifestyle changes, behavioural approaches and health policies with at least 6 months' follow-up were included. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease events, coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 139 randomised trials, including 1,053,772 participants, proved suitable for quantitative synthesis. Blood pressure-lowering medications (risk ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.94), tight blood pressure control (risk ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96), statins (risk ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.91) and multifactorial lifestyle interventions (risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.92) reduced composite cardiovascular events and mortality.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Residual confounding may exist. Few direct head-to-head comparisons limited differentiation between some specific modalities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found evidence that blood pressure treatments, intense blood pressure targets, statins when appropriate and multifactorial lifestyle changes are the most effective strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, with unclear effects from other interventions. These findings can inform clinical guidelines and health policies prioritising interventions.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This research article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/148/05.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/RLDH7432\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/RLDH7432","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心血管疾病在世界范围内造成了大量的死亡率和医疗费用。存在许多初级预防干预措施,但缺乏对长期影响的正面比较。目的:通过随机试验的网络荟萃分析,确定初级心血管疾病预防干预措施的比较有效性。数据来源:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,会议摘要和从成立到2021年3月的试验注册。回顾方法:纳入药物治疗、营养补充剂、生活方式改变、行为方法和健康政策的随机对照试验,随访至少6个月。对全因死亡率、心血管疾病事件、冠心病和心血管疾病死亡率进行两两和网络荟萃分析。结果:139项随机试验的数据,包括1,053,772名参与者,证明适合定量合成。降压药(风险比0.82,95%置信区间0.71 ~ 0.94)、严格血压控制(风险比0.66,95%置信区间0.46 ~ 0.96)、他汀类药物(风险比0.81,95%置信区间0.71 ~ 0.91)和多因素生活方式干预(风险比0.75,95%置信区间0.61 ~ 0.92)降低了复合心血管事件和死亡率。局限性:可能存在残留混淆。很少有直接的正面比较限制了某些特定模式之间的区别。结论:我们发现有证据表明,血压治疗、高强度血压目标、适当时使用他汀类药物和多因素生活方式改变是心血管疾病一级预防最有效的策略,其他干预措施的效果尚不清楚。这些发现可以为临床指南和优先考虑干预措施的卫生政策提供信息。资助:这篇研究文章介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目资助的独立研究,奖励号为17/148/05。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying optimal primary prevention interventions for major cardiovascular disease events and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and hierarchical network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Background: Cardiovascular disease accounts for substantial mortality and healthcare costs worldwide. Numerous interventions exist for primary prevention but lack head-to-head comparisons on long-term impacts.

Objective: To determine the comparative effectiveness of interventions for primary cardiovascular disease prevention through network meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference abstracts and trial registries from inception to March 2021.

Review methods: Randomised controlled trials of pharmacologic therapies, nutritional supplements, lifestyle changes, behavioural approaches and health policies with at least 6 months' follow-up were included. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease events, coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease mortality.

Results: Data from 139 randomised trials, including 1,053,772 participants, proved suitable for quantitative synthesis. Blood pressure-lowering medications (risk ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.94), tight blood pressure control (risk ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96), statins (risk ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.91) and multifactorial lifestyle interventions (risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.92) reduced composite cardiovascular events and mortality.

Limitations: Residual confounding may exist. Few direct head-to-head comparisons limited differentiation between some specific modalities.

Conclusions: We found evidence that blood pressure treatments, intense blood pressure targets, statins when appropriate and multifactorial lifestyle changes are the most effective strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, with unclear effects from other interventions. These findings can inform clinical guidelines and health policies prioritising interventions.

Funding: This research article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/148/05.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信