血管紧张素受体阻滞剂对高血压和心血管风险管理的新见解:观察性研究帮助我们?

The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal Pub Date : 2014-04-04 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01 DOI:10.2174/1874192401408010035
Assen Goudev
{"title":"血管紧张素受体阻滞剂对高血压和心血管风险管理的新见解:观察性研究帮助我们?","authors":"Assen Goudev","doi":"10.2174/1874192401408010035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Post-marketing observational studies are valuable for establishing the real-world effectiveness of treatment regimens in routine clinical practice as they typically monitor a diverse population of patients over many months. This article reviews recent observational studies of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for the management of hypertension: the 6-month eprosartan POWER study (n~29,400), the 3-month valsartan translational research programme (n~19,500), the 9-month irbesartan Treat to Target study (n=14,200), the 6-month irbesartan DO-IT survey (n~3300) and the 12-week candesartan CHILI survey programme (n=4600). Reduction in blood pressure with ARBs reported across these studies appears to be comparable for the different agents, although direct comparisons between studies cannot be made owing to different treatment durations and baseline patient demographics. Of these studies, the eprosartan POWER study, 2 of the 7 studies in the valsartan translational research programme, and the candesartan CHILI Triple T study measured total cardiovascular risk, as recommended in the 2013 European Society of Cardiology-European Society of Hypertension guidelines. The POWER study confirmed the value of the Systemic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) to accurately assess total cardiovascular risk. With the advent of new healthcare practices, such as the use of electronic health records (EHRs), observational studies in larger patient populations will become possible. In the future, algorithms embedded in EHR systems could evolve as decision support tools to inform on patient care. </p>","PeriodicalId":504447,"journal":{"name":"The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal","volume":"8 ","pages":"35-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d7/83/TOCMJ-8-35.PMC4021208.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New insights into the management of hypertension and cardiovascular risk with Angiotensin receptor blockers: observational studies help us?\",\"authors\":\"Assen Goudev\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874192401408010035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Post-marketing observational studies are valuable for establishing the real-world effectiveness of treatment regimens in routine clinical practice as they typically monitor a diverse population of patients over many months. This article reviews recent observational studies of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for the management of hypertension: the 6-month eprosartan POWER study (n~29,400), the 3-month valsartan translational research programme (n~19,500), the 9-month irbesartan Treat to Target study (n=14,200), the 6-month irbesartan DO-IT survey (n~3300) and the 12-week candesartan CHILI survey programme (n=4600). Reduction in blood pressure with ARBs reported across these studies appears to be comparable for the different agents, although direct comparisons between studies cannot be made owing to different treatment durations and baseline patient demographics. Of these studies, the eprosartan POWER study, 2 of the 7 studies in the valsartan translational research programme, and the candesartan CHILI Triple T study measured total cardiovascular risk, as recommended in the 2013 European Society of Cardiology-European Society of Hypertension guidelines. The POWER study confirmed the value of the Systemic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) to accurately assess total cardiovascular risk. With the advent of new healthcare practices, such as the use of electronic health records (EHRs), observational studies in larger patient populations will become possible. In the future, algorithms embedded in EHR systems could evolve as decision support tools to inform on patient care. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":504447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"35-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d7/83/TOCMJ-8-35.PMC4021208.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874192401408010035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2014/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874192401408010035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

上市后观察性研究对于在常规临床实践中建立治疗方案的实际有效性是有价值的,因为它们通常在几个月内监测不同的患者群体。本文回顾了近期血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)治疗高血压的观察性研究:6个月的依伯沙坦POWER研究(n~29,400), 3个月的缬沙坦转化研究计划(n~19,500), 9个月的厄贝沙坦治疗靶研究(n=14,200), 6个月的厄贝沙坦DO-IT调查(n~3300)和12周的坎地沙坦CHILI调查计划(n=4600)。尽管由于治疗时间和基线患者人口统计数据的不同,研究之间无法进行直接比较,但这些研究中报告的arb对不同药物的血压降低似乎具有可比性。在这些研究中,依伯沙坦POWER研究、缬沙坦转化研究项目的7项研究中的2项和坎地沙坦CHILI Triple T研究测量了总心血管风险,这是2013年欧洲心脏病学会-欧洲高血压学会指南中推荐的。POWER研究证实了系统性冠状动脉风险评估(SCORE)在准确评估总心血管风险方面的价值。随着新的医疗保健实践的出现,例如电子健康记录(EHRs)的使用,在更大的患者群体中进行观察性研究将成为可能。在未来,嵌入在电子病历系统中的算法可以演变为决策支持工具,为患者护理提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

New insights into the management of hypertension and cardiovascular risk with Angiotensin receptor blockers: observational studies help us?

New insights into the management of hypertension and cardiovascular risk with Angiotensin receptor blockers: observational studies help us?

New insights into the management of hypertension and cardiovascular risk with Angiotensin receptor blockers: observational studies help us?

New insights into the management of hypertension and cardiovascular risk with Angiotensin receptor blockers: observational studies help us?

Post-marketing observational studies are valuable for establishing the real-world effectiveness of treatment regimens in routine clinical practice as they typically monitor a diverse population of patients over many months. This article reviews recent observational studies of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for the management of hypertension: the 6-month eprosartan POWER study (n~29,400), the 3-month valsartan translational research programme (n~19,500), the 9-month irbesartan Treat to Target study (n=14,200), the 6-month irbesartan DO-IT survey (n~3300) and the 12-week candesartan CHILI survey programme (n=4600). Reduction in blood pressure with ARBs reported across these studies appears to be comparable for the different agents, although direct comparisons between studies cannot be made owing to different treatment durations and baseline patient demographics. Of these studies, the eprosartan POWER study, 2 of the 7 studies in the valsartan translational research programme, and the candesartan CHILI Triple T study measured total cardiovascular risk, as recommended in the 2013 European Society of Cardiology-European Society of Hypertension guidelines. The POWER study confirmed the value of the Systemic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) to accurately assess total cardiovascular risk. With the advent of new healthcare practices, such as the use of electronic health records (EHRs), observational studies in larger patient populations will become possible. In the future, algorithms embedded in EHR systems could evolve as decision support tools to inform on patient care.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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