Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of resistant hypertension in treated hypertensive populations
Standard
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of resistant hypertension in treated hypertensive populations. / Achelrod, Dmitrij; Wenzel, Ulrich; Frey, Simon.
in: AM J HYPERTENS, Jahrgang 28, Nr. 3, 03.2015, S. 355-61.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Review › Forschung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of resistant hypertension in treated hypertensive populations
AU - Achelrod, Dmitrij
AU - Wenzel, Ulrich
AU - Frey, Simon
N1 - © American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd 2014. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
PY - 2015/3
Y1 - 2015/3
N2 - BACKGROUND: Although treatment-resistant hypertension (RH) is a serious burden on population health, there exists uncertainty about its prevalence. Hence, the objectives of this work were to systematically review and critically appraise the literature and to conduct a meta-analysis on the prevalence of RH in treated hypertensive populations.METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, CRD York databases, and study bibliographies were systematically searched for observational and interventional studies that report disease frequency in adult populations. The pooled prevalence was obtained through random-effect modeling. Furthermore, quality assessment, publication bias diagnostics, meta-regression, subgroup analysis by sex, and sensitivity analysis were performed.RESULTS: Out of 318 retrieved studies, 20 observational studies and 4 randomized control trials (RCTs) with a total population of 961,035 were included. The random-effect method for observational studies and RCTs yielded RH prevalence ratios of 13.72% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.19%-16.24%) and 16.32% (95% CI = 10.68%-21.95%), respectively. Yet, most studies were incapable of ruling out pseudo-resistance caused by white-coat effect, poor medication adherence, and suboptimal dosing. Differences in RH prevalence by sex were negligible. Meta-regression analysis showed that study-level characteristics had no statistically significant influence on RH prevalence. The inclusion of further studies in the sensitivity analysis concurred with the baseline results (13.19%; 95% CI = 10.89%-15.49%).CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should enhance comparability of future empirical evidence through homogeneous methodologies and comparable baseline populations. This meta-analysis concludes that RH is a frequent phenomenon and further harmonization in terms of RH definition and measurement would be necessary to clearly distinguish true treatment resistance from pseudo-resistance.
AB - BACKGROUND: Although treatment-resistant hypertension (RH) is a serious burden on population health, there exists uncertainty about its prevalence. Hence, the objectives of this work were to systematically review and critically appraise the literature and to conduct a meta-analysis on the prevalence of RH in treated hypertensive populations.METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, CRD York databases, and study bibliographies were systematically searched for observational and interventional studies that report disease frequency in adult populations. The pooled prevalence was obtained through random-effect modeling. Furthermore, quality assessment, publication bias diagnostics, meta-regression, subgroup analysis by sex, and sensitivity analysis were performed.RESULTS: Out of 318 retrieved studies, 20 observational studies and 4 randomized control trials (RCTs) with a total population of 961,035 were included. The random-effect method for observational studies and RCTs yielded RH prevalence ratios of 13.72% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.19%-16.24%) and 16.32% (95% CI = 10.68%-21.95%), respectively. Yet, most studies were incapable of ruling out pseudo-resistance caused by white-coat effect, poor medication adherence, and suboptimal dosing. Differences in RH prevalence by sex were negligible. Meta-regression analysis showed that study-level characteristics had no statistically significant influence on RH prevalence. The inclusion of further studies in the sensitivity analysis concurred with the baseline results (13.19%; 95% CI = 10.89%-15.49%).CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should enhance comparability of future empirical evidence through homogeneous methodologies and comparable baseline populations. This meta-analysis concludes that RH is a frequent phenomenon and further harmonization in terms of RH definition and measurement would be necessary to clearly distinguish true treatment resistance from pseudo-resistance.
KW - Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use
KW - Humans
KW - Hypertension/drug therapy
KW - Observational Studies as Topic
KW - Prevalence
KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
KW - Treatment Failure
U2 - 10.1093/ajh/hpu151
DO - 10.1093/ajh/hpu151
M3 - SCORING: Review article
C2 - 25156625
VL - 28
SP - 355
EP - 361
JO - AM J HYPERTENS
JF - AM J HYPERTENS
SN - 0895-7061
IS - 3
ER -