Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Aug 8;8(8):CD011575.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011575.pub2.

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in older adults

Scott R Garrison  1 , Michael R Kolber, Christina S Korownyk, Rita K McCracken, Balraj S Heran, G Michael Allan
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in older adults

Scott R Garrison et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

Abstract

Background: Eight out of 10 major antihypertensive trials in older adults attempted to achieve a target systolic blood pressure (BP) less than 160 mmHg. Collectively these trials demonstrated benefit for treatment, as compared to no treatment, for an older adult with BP greater than 160 mmHg. However an even lower BP target of less than 140 mmHg is commonly applied to all age groups. At the present time it is not known whether a lower or higher BP target is associated with better cardiovascular outcomes in older adults.

Objectives: To assess the effects of a higher (less than 150 to 160/95 to 105 mmHg) BP target compared to the lower BP target of less than 140/90 mmHg in hypertensive adults 65 years of age or older.

Search methods: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to February 2017: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work.

Selection criteria: Randomised trials, of at least one year's duration, conducted on hypertensive adults aged 65 years or older, which report the effect on mortality and morbidity of a higher systolic or diastolic BP treatment target (whether ambulatory, home, or office measurements) in the range of systolic BP less than 150 to 160 mmHg or diastolic BP less than 95 to 105 mmHg as compared to a lower BP treatment target of less than 140/90 mmHg or lower.

Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently screened and selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We combined data for dichotomous outcomes using the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and for continuous outcomes we used mean difference (MD). Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, stroke, institutionalisation, and cardiovascular serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, non-cardiovascular mortality, unplanned hospitalisation, each component of cardiovascular serious adverse events separately (including cerebrovascular disease, cardiac disease, vascular disease, and renal failure), total serious adverse events, total minor adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse effects, systolic BP achieved, and diastolic BP achieved.

Main results: We found and included three unblinded randomised trials in 8221 older adults (mean age 74.8 years), in which higher BP targets of less than 150/90 mmHg (two trials) and less than 160/90 mmHg (one trial) were compared to a lower target of less than 140/90 mmHg. Treatment to the two different BP targets over two to four years failed to produce a difference in any of our primary outcomes, including all-cause mortality (RR 1.24 95% CI 0.99 to 1.54), stroke (RR 1.25 95% CI 0.94 to 1.67) and total cardiovascular serious adverse events (RR 1.19 95% CI 0.98 to 1.45). However, the 95% confidence intervals of these outcomes suggest the lower BP target is probably not worse, and might offer a clinically important benefit. We judged all comparisons to be based on low-quality evidence. Data on adverse effects were not available from all trials and not different, including total serious adverse events, total minor adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse effects.

Authors' conclusions: At the present time there is insufficient evidence to know whether a higher BP target (less than150 to 160/95 to 105 mmHg) or a lower BP target (less than 140/90 mmHg) is better for older adults with high BP. Additional good-quality trials assessing BP targets in this population are needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Scott Garrison: none

Mike Kolber: none

Tina Korownyk: none

Rita McCracken: none

Benji Heran: none

G Michael Allan: none

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram
2
2
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study
3
3
Forest plot of comparison higher (< 150‐160/95‐100 mmHg) versus lower (< 140/90 mmHg) BP target, outcome 1. All‐cause mortality.
4
4
Forest plot of comparison higher (< 150‐160/95‐100 mmHg) versus lower (< 140/90 mmHg) BP target, outcome 2. Stroke
5
5
Forest plot of comparison higher (< 150‐160/95‐100 mmHg) versus lower (< 140/90 mmHg) BP target, outcome 4. Cardiovascular serious adverse events
6
6
Forest plot of comparison higher (< 150‐160/95‐100 mmHg) versus lower (< 140/90 mmHg) BP target, outcome7. Withdrawals due to adverse effects
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

JATOS 2008 {published data only}
    1. Hayashi K, Saruta T, Goto Y, Ishii M, on behalf of the JATOS Study Group. Impact of renal function on cardiovascular events in elderly hypertensive patients treated with efonidipine: renal subset analysis of the Japanese trial to assess optimal systolic blood pressure in elderly hypertensive patients (JATOS). Hypertension Research 2010;33:1211‐20. - PubMed
    1. JATOS Study Group. Principal results of the Japanese trial to assess optimal systolic blood pressure in elderly hypertensive patients (JATOS). Hypertension Research 2008;31(12):2115‐27. - PubMed
    1. JATOS Study Group. The Japanese trial to assess optimal systolic blood pressure in elderly hypertensive patients (JATOS): protocol, patient characteristics, and blood pressure during the first 12 months. Hypertension Research 2005;28(6):513‐20. - PubMed
    1. Kawano Y, Ogihara T, Saruta T, Goto Y, Ishii M. Association of blood pressure control and metabolic syndrome with cardiovascular risk in elderly Japanese: JATOS study. American Journal of Hypertension 2011;24(11):1250‐6. - PubMed
    1. Rakugi H, Ogihara T, Goto Y, Ishii M, on behalf of the JATOS Study Group. Comparison of strict‐ and mild‐blood pressure control in elderly hypertensive patients: a per‐protocol analysis of JATOS. Hypertension Research 2010;33:1124‐8. - PubMed
VALISH 2010 {published data only}
    1. Ogihara T, Saruta T, Matsuoka H, Shimamoto K, Fujita T, Shimada K, et al. Valsartan in elderly isolated systolic hypertension (VALISH) study: rationale and design. Hypertension Research 2004;27(9):657‐61. - PubMed
    1. Ogihara T, Saruta T, Rakugi H, Matsuoka H, Shimamoto K, Shimada K, et al. Target blood pressure for treatment of isolated systolic hypertension in the elderly: valsartan in elderly isolated systolic hypertension study. Hypertension 2010;56(2):196‐202. - PubMed
Wei 2013 {published data only}
    1. Jin Z, Guoying S, Xiaowei Z, Ye Z, Pingyan F, Junying P, et al. Intensified antihypertensive therapy and blood pressure variability in older than 70 of Chinese hypertensive patients. Heart. 2011; Vol. 97, issue 3:A193.
    1. Wei Y, Jin Z, Shen G, Zhao X, Yang W, Zhong Y, et al. Effects of intensive antihypertensive treatment on Chinese hypertensive patients older than 70 years. Journal of Clinical Hypertension 2013;15(6):420‐7. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Arima 2006 {published data only}
    1. Arima H, Chalmers J, Woodward M, Anderson C, Rodgers A, Davis S, et al. Lower target blood pressures are safe and effective for the prevention of recurrent stroke: the PROGRESS trial. Journal of Hypertension 2006;24(6):1201‐8. - PubMed
Denardo 2010 {published data only}
    1. Denardo SJ, Gong Y, Nichols WW, Messerli FH, Bavry AA, Cooper‐DeHoff RM, et al. Blood pressure and outcomes in very old hypertensive coronary artery disease patients: an INVEST substudy. American Journal of Medicine 2010;123(8):719‐26. - PMC - PubMed
Ihle‐Hansen 2015 {published data only}
    1. Ihle‐Hansen H, Thommessen B, Fagerland MW, Oksengard AR, Wyller TB, Engedal K, et al. Blood pressure control to prevent decline in cognition after stroke. Vascular Health and Risk Management 2015;11:311‐6. - PMC - PubMed
Ogihara 2008 {published data only}
    1. Ogihara T, Nakao K, Fukui T, Fukiyama K, Fujimoto A, Ueshima K, et al. The optimal target blood pressure for antihypertensive treatment in Japanese elderly patients with high‐risk hypertension: a subanalysis of the Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE‐J) trial. Hypertension Research 2008;31(8):1595‐601. - PubMed
Ogihara 2009 {published data only}
    1. Ogihara T, Saruta T, Rakugi H, Fujimoto A, Ueshima K, Yasuno S, et al. Relationship between the achieved blood pressure and the incidence of cardiovascular events in Japanese hypertensive patients with complications: a sub‐analysis of the CASE‐J trial. Hypertension Research 2009;32:248‐54. - PubMed
Ogihara 2011 {published data only}
    1. Ogihara T, Matsuoka H, Rakugi H. Practitioner’s trial on the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment in elderly patients with hypertension II (PATE‐Hypertension II study) in Japan. Geriatrics & Gerontology International 2011;11:414‐21. - PubMed
Ogihara 2012 {published data only}
    1. Ogihara T, Fujimoto A, Ueshima K, Nakao K, Saruta T. Optimal blood pressure to prevent cardiovascular events in the elderly high‐risk hypertensive patients: subanalysis of the CASE‐J Ex study. Journal of Hypertension. 2012; Vol. 30, issue e‐Supplement 1:e244‐5.
Omboni 2015 {published data only}
    1. Omboni S, Malacco E, Mallion JM, Volpe M. Olmesartan vs ramipril in the treatment of hypertension and associated clinical conditions in the elderly: a reanalysis of two large double‐blind, randomized studies at the light of the most recent blood pressure targets recommended by guidelines. Clinical Interventions in Aging 2015;10:1575‐86. - PMC - PubMed
Saito 2011 {published data only}
    1. Saito I, Suzuki H, Kageyama S, Saruta T. Treatment of hypertension in patients 85 years of age or older: a J‐BRAVE substudy. Clinical and Experimental Hypertension 2011;33(5):275‐80. - PubMed
Saxby 2008 {published data only}
    1. Saxby BK, Harrington F, Wesnes KA, McKeith IG, Ford GA. Candesartan and cognitive decline in older patients with hypertension: a substudy of the SCOPE trial. Neurology 2008;70(19 Pt 2):1858‐66. - PubMed
SPRINT 2015 {published data only}
    1. SPRINT Research Group. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood‐pressure control. New England Journal of Medicine 2015;373(22):2103‐16. - PMC - PubMed
Steurer 2016 {published data only}
    1. Steurer J. Intensive blood pressure treatment vs. less intensive treatment [Intensive Blutdruckbehandlung vs. weniger intensive Behandlung]. Praxis (Bern 1994) 2016;105(4):225‐6. [10.1024/1661‐8157/a002281] - PubMed
Zhang 2011 {published data only}
    1. Zhang Y, Zhang X, Liu L, Zanchetti A. Is a systolic blood pressure target <140 mmHg indicated in all hypertensives? Subgroup analyses of findings from the randomized FEVER trial. European Heart Journal 2011;32(12):1500‐8. - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Cai 2017 {unpublished data only}
    1. Cai J. Strategy of blood pressure intervention in the elderly hypertensive patients (STEP). clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03015311. - PubMed
White 2013 {published data only}
    1. White WB, Marfatia R, Schmidt J, Wakefield DB, Kaplan RF, Bohannon RW, et al. Intensive versus standard ambulatory blood pressure lowering to prevent functional decline in the elderly (INFINITY). American Heart Journal 2013;165(3):258‐65. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.11.008] - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Additional references

Aronow 2011
    1. Aronow WS, Fleg JL, Pepine CJ, Artinian NT, Bakris G, Brown AS, et al. ACCF/AHA 2011 expert consensus document on hypertension in the elderly: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation 2011;123(21):2434‐506. - PubMed
Beckett 2008
    1. Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE, Staessen JA, Liu L, Dumitrascu D, et al. Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. New England Journal of Medicine 2008;358(18):1887‐98. - PubMed
Cadieux 1989
    1. Cadieux RJ. Drug interactions in the elderly. How multiple drug use increases risk exponentially. Postgraduate Medicine 1989;86(8):179‐86. - PubMed
Chan 2005
    1. Chan BT, Schultz SE. Supply and utilization of general practitioner and family physician services in Ontario. ICES investigative report. Toronto, ON: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences www.ices.on.ca/file/FP‐GP_aug08_FINAL.pdf. Toronto, ON, (accessed 12 November 2013).
Chen 2010
    1. Chen N, Zhou M, Yang M, Guo J, Zhu C, Yang J, et al. Calcium channel blockers versus other classes of drugs for hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003654.pub4] - DOI - PubMed
Dai 2009
    1. Dai S, Bancej C, Bienek A, Walsh P, Stewart P, Wielgosz A. 2009 Tracking Heart Disease and Stroke in Canada. Report from the Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System. www.phac‐aspc.gc.ca/publicat/2009/cvd‐avc/index‐eng.php (accessed 18 March 2015).
Daskalopoulou 2012
    1. Daskalopoulou SS, Khan NA, Quinn RR, Ruzicka M, McKay DW, Hackam DG, et al. Canadian Hypertension Education Program. The 2012 Canadian hypertension education program recommendations for the management of hypertension: blood pressure measurement, diagnosis, assessment of risk, and therapy. Canadian Journal of Cardiology May 2012;28(3):270‐87. - PubMed
Deeks 2011
    1. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (editors). Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Ettehad 2016
    1. Ettehad D, Emdin CA, Kiran A, Anderson SG, Callender T, Emberson J, et al. Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Lancet 2016;387(10022):957‐67. - PubMed
Finegold 2013
    1. Finegold JA, Asaria P, Francis DP. Mortality from ischaemic heart disease by country, region, and age: statistics from World Health Organisation and United Nations. International Journal of Cardiology 2013;168(2):934‐45. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557‐60. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org.
Hilmer 2007
    1. Hilmer SN, McLachlan AJ, Couteur DG. Clinical pharmacology in the geriatric patient. Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology 2007;21(3):217‐30. - PubMed
Jamerson 2008
    1. Jamerson K, Weber MA, Bakris GL, Dahlof B, Pitt B, Shi V, et al. Benazepril plus amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension in high‐risk patients. New England Journal of Medicine 2008;359(23):2417‐28. - PubMed
Lefebvre 2011
    1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Lewington 2002
    1. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age‐specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta‐analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 2002;360(9349):1903‐13. - PubMed
Liberati 2009
    1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009;339:b2700. [DOI: ] - PMC - PubMed
Mancia 2009
    1. Mancia G, Laurent S, Agabiti‐Rosei E, Ambrosioni E, Burnier M, Caulfield MJ, et al. Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. Blood Pressure 2009;18(6):308‐47. - PubMed
Masoudi 2003
    1. Masoudi FA, Havranek EP, Wolfe P, Gross CP, Rathore SS, Steiner JF, et al. Most hospitalized older persons do not meet the enrolment criteria for clinical trials in heart failure. American Heart Journal 2003;146(2):250‐7. - PubMed
Musini 2009
    1. Musini VM, Tejani AM, Bassett K, Wright JM. Pharmacotherapy for hypertension in the elderly. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000028.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Odden 2012
    1. Odden MC, Peralta CA, Haan MN, Covinsky KE. Rethinking the association of high blood pressure with mortality in elderly adults: the impact of frailty. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012;172(15):1162‐8. - PMC - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Sabayan 2012
    1. Sabayan B, Oleksik AM, Maier AB, Buchem MA, Poortvliet RK, Ruijter W, et al. High blood pressure and resilience to physical and cognitive decline in the oldest old: the Leiden 85‐plus Study. Journal of the American Geriatric Society 2012;60(11):2014‐9. - PubMed
Van Spall 2007
    1. Spall HG, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high‐impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA 2007;297(11):1233‐40. - PubMed
Wiysonge 2017
    1. Wiysonge CS, Bradley HA, Volmink J, Mayosi BM, Opie LH. Beta‐blockers for hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002003.pub5] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Wright 2009
    1. Wright JM, Musini VM. First‐line drugs for hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001841.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Xue 2015
    1. Xue H, Lu Z, Tang WL, Pang LW, Wang GM, Wong GWK, et al. First‐line drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system versus other first‐line antihypertensive drug classes for hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008170.pub2] - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources