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
. 2023 Aug 1;30(10):1028-1038.
doi: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwad158.

Orthostatic hypertension and major adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zahra Pasdar  1 , Lorenzo De Paola  1 , Ben Carter  2 , Tiberiu A Pana  1 , John F Potter  3 , Phyo K Myint  1   4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Orthostatic hypertension and major adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zahra Pasdar et al. Eur J Prev Cardiol. .

Abstract

Aims: The role of orthostatic hypertension (OHT) in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality is unclear. We aimed to determine if this association exists through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods and results: Study inclusion criteria included: (i) any observational/interventional studies of participants aged ≥18 years (ii) that assessed the relationship between OHT and (iii) at least one outcome measure-all-cause mortality (primary outcome), coronary heart disease, heart failure, stroke/cerebrovascular disease, or neurocognitive decline. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and PubMed were independently searched by two reviewers (inception-19 April 2022). Critical appraisals were conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using a generic inverse variance method, and narrative synthesis or pooled results were presented as an odds or hazards ratio (OR/HR), with 95% confidence interval. Twenty studies (n = 61 669; 47.3% women) were eligible, of which 13 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 55 456; 47.3% women). Median interquartile range (IQR) follow-up for prospective studies was 7.85 (4.12, 10.83) years. Eleven studies were of good quality, eight fair, and one poor. Relative to orthostatic normotension (ONT), systolic OHT (SOHT) was associated with a significant 21% greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.21, 1.05-1.40), 39% increased risk of CVD mortality based on two studies (HR: 1.39, 1.05-1.84), and near doubled odds of stroke/cerebrovascular disease (OR: 1.94, 1.52-2.48). The lack of association with other outcomes may be due to weak evidence or low statistical power.

Conclusion: Patients with SOHT may have higher mortality risk relative to those with ONT and increased odds of stroke/cerebrovascular disease. Whether interventions can reduce OHT and improve outcomes should be explored.

Keywords: Cardiovascular disease; Meta-analysis; Mortality; Orthostatic hypertension; Systematic review.

Plain language summary

Orthostatic hypertension (OHT) is defined as an arbitrary rise in upper (systolic) and/or lower (diastolic) blood pressure readings on standing. We performed a thorough literature search and combined the evidence of impact of OHT on future adverse events, including death, heart attack, heart failure, stroke, falls, and impaired cognition. We found the following:Twenty studies that investigated the association between OHT and future adverse events. Of these, 13 were eligible to be included in the combined evidence (meta-analysis). This formed a total sample of 61 669 participants (47.3% women), of which 55 456 (47.3% women) were included in the meta-analysis.Systolic OHT (SOHT) was associated with a significant 21% increased risk for death from any cause, a 39% greater risk of death due to heart and blood vessel disease and near doubled odds of stroke or brain vessel disease. Furthermore, three of four studies found a significant association between SOHT and impaired cognition. Diastolic OHT was not found to be associated with these outcomes. The lack of association with other outcomes investigated may be due to weak evidence.Eleven studies were of good quality, eight fair, and one poor. Differences in study design, study criteria, and study populations mean that the results need interpreting with caution. Future robust studies can build on this evidence to assess if treatment to reduce OHT would improve future outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: None declared.

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types