Cargando…

What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT

BACKGROUND: In view of the aging population, the target value for treatment in elderly hypertensive patients is today a clinically relevant problem. METHODS: STEP and SPRINT studies enrolled elderly subjects with exclusion of previous stroke patients. However, STEP enrolled subjects at lower cardiov...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Modesti, Pietro Amedeo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8710416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988556
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcrp.2021.200116
_version_ 1784623148556091392
author Modesti, Pietro Amedeo
author_facet Modesti, Pietro Amedeo
author_sort Modesti, Pietro Amedeo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In view of the aging population, the target value for treatment in elderly hypertensive patients is today a clinically relevant problem. METHODS: STEP and SPRINT studies enrolled elderly subjects with exclusion of previous stroke patients. However, STEP enrolled subjects at lower cardiovascular risk than SPRINT. RESULTS: In Chinese hypertensive patients aged 60–80 years enrolled in the STEP study, intensive blood pressure treatment (systolic blood pressure target of 110–130 mmHg) reduced the primary composite cardiovascular endpoint and stroke with no effect on cardiovascular death and renal harm, two endpoints significantly affected in SPRINT. CONCLUSION: Differences with SPRINT are the lower cardiovascular risk and CKD prevalence of STEP population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8710416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87104162022-01-04 What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT Modesti, Pietro Amedeo Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev Invited Commentary BACKGROUND: In view of the aging population, the target value for treatment in elderly hypertensive patients is today a clinically relevant problem. METHODS: STEP and SPRINT studies enrolled elderly subjects with exclusion of previous stroke patients. However, STEP enrolled subjects at lower cardiovascular risk than SPRINT. RESULTS: In Chinese hypertensive patients aged 60–80 years enrolled in the STEP study, intensive blood pressure treatment (systolic blood pressure target of 110–130 mmHg) reduced the primary composite cardiovascular endpoint and stroke with no effect on cardiovascular death and renal harm, two endpoints significantly affected in SPRINT. CONCLUSION: Differences with SPRINT are the lower cardiovascular risk and CKD prevalence of STEP population. Elsevier 2021-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8710416/ /pubmed/34988556 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcrp.2021.200116 Text en © 2021 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Invited Commentary
Modesti, Pietro Amedeo
What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title_full What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title_fullStr What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title_full_unstemmed What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title_short What we learned from STEP that we didn't already know from SPRINT
title_sort what we learned from step that we didn't already know from sprint
topic Invited Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8710416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988556
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcrp.2021.200116
work_keys_str_mv AT modestipietroamedeo whatwelearnedfromstepthatwedidntalreadyknowfromsprint