Speciality Medical Dialogues
    • facebook
    • twitter
    Login Register
    • facebook
    • twitter
    Login Register
    • Medical Dialogues
    • Education Dialogues
    • Business Dialogues
    • Medical Jobs
    • Medical Matrimony
    • MD Brand Connect
    Speciality Medical Dialogues
    • Editorial
    • News
        • Anesthesiology
        • Cancer
        • Cardiac Sciences
        • Critical Care
        • Dentistry
        • Dermatology
        • Diabetes and Endo
        • Diagnostics
        • ENT
        • Featured Research
        • Gastroenterology
        • Geriatrics
        • Medicine
        • Nephrology
        • Neurosciences
        • Nursing
        • Obs and Gynae
        • Ophthalmology
        • Orthopaedics
        • Paediatrics
        • Parmedics
        • Pharmacy
        • Psychiatry
        • Pulmonology
        • Radiology
        • Surgery
        • Urology
    • Practice Guidelines
        • Anesthesiology Guidelines
        • Cancer Guidelines
        • Cardiac Sciences Guidelines
        • Critical Care Guidelines
        • Dentistry Guidelines
        • Dermatology Guidelines
        • Diabetes and Endo Guidelines
        • Diagnostics Guidelines
        • ENT Guidelines
        • Featured Practice Guidelines
        • Gastroenterology Guidelines
        • Geriatrics Guidelines
        • Medicine Guidelines
        • Nephrology Guidelines
        • Neurosciences Guidelines
        • Obs and Gynae Guidelines
        • Ophthalmology Guidelines
        • Orthopaedics Guidelines
        • Paediatrics Guidelines
        • Psychiatry Guidelines
        • Pulmonology Guidelines
        • Radiology Guidelines
        • Surgery Guidelines
        • Urology Guidelines
    LoginRegister
    Speciality Medical Dialogues
    LoginRegister
    • Home
    • Editorial
    • News
      • Anesthesiology
      • Cancer
      • Cardiac Sciences
      • Critical Care
      • Dentistry
      • Dermatology
      • Diabetes and Endo
      • Diagnostics
      • ENT
      • Featured Research
      • Gastroenterology
      • Geriatrics
      • Medicine
      • Nephrology
      • Neurosciences
      • Nursing
      • Obs and Gynae
      • Ophthalmology
      • Orthopaedics
      • Paediatrics
      • Parmedics
      • Pharmacy
      • Psychiatry
      • Pulmonology
      • Radiology
      • Surgery
      • Urology
    • Practice Guidelines
      • Anesthesiology Guidelines
      • Cancer Guidelines
      • Cardiac Sciences Guidelines
      • Critical Care Guidelines
      • Dentistry Guidelines
      • Dermatology Guidelines
      • Diabetes and Endo Guidelines
      • Diagnostics Guidelines
      • ENT Guidelines
      • Featured Practice Guidelines
      • Gastroenterology Guidelines
      • Geriatrics Guidelines
      • Medicine Guidelines
      • Nephrology Guidelines
      • Neurosciences Guidelines
      • Obs and Gynae Guidelines
      • Ophthalmology Guidelines
      • Orthopaedics Guidelines
      • Paediatrics Guidelines
      • Psychiatry Guidelines
      • Pulmonology Guidelines
      • Radiology Guidelines
      • Surgery Guidelines
      • Urology Guidelines
    • Home
    • News
    • Cardiac Sciences
    • Intensive control of...

    Intensive control of high BP no better in Acute Stroke: Lancet

    Written by Deepanjana Sarkar Published On 2019-02-17T19:30:31+05:30  |  Updated On 17 Feb 2019 7:30 PM IST
    Intensive control of high BP no better in Acute Stroke: Lancet

    An ECHANTED trial of thrombolysis indicated that intensive control of high BP, High blood pressure in case of intracranial haemorrhage did not lead to improved clinical outcome compared with guideline treatment in ischemic stroke patients eligible for thrombolytics. The findings of the study appeared in LANCET.


    Systolic blood pressure of more than 185 mm Hg is a contraindication to thrombolytic treatment with intravenous alteplase in patients with acute ischaemic stroke, but the target systolic blood pressure for an optimal outcome is uncertain.



    Craig S Anderson at the George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia and colleagues and colleagues assessed intensive blood pressure lowering compared with guideline-recommended blood pressure lowering in patients treated with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke.


    The researchers conducted an international, partial-factorial, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial of thrombolysis-eligible patients (age ≥18 years) with acute ischaemic stroke and systolic blood pressure 150 mm Hg or more, who were screened at 110 sites in 15 countries.


    The prospective, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial included 2,227 patients eligible for alteplase (Activase) or treated for an acute ischemic stroke less than 4.5 hours after onset and who had a systolic blood pressure of at least 150 mm Hg.


    These patients were randomized within 6 hours of stroke onset to intensive blood pressure lowering to 130-140 mm Hg systolic within 1 hour or guideline-directed blood pressure management to less than 180 mm Hg systolic, both for 72 hours atop background optimal care.




    They found that while intensive management was safe, the trial provided no evidence to support a major change in the guidelines. The Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores were not shifted toward better function by targeting 130-140 mm Hg systolic pressure in the first hour after presentation compared with the standard limit of 180 mm Hg (OR 1.01, P=0.87). Similar findings emerged whether per protocol or adjusted for deviations and across stroke severity quartiles.


    There was significantly less intracranial haemorrhage, though, in the intensively managed group (14.8% vs 18.7%, OR 0.75, P=0.0137), Craig Anderson, MD, PhD, of the University of Sydney, Australia, reported here at the American Heart Association's International Stroke Conference.


    There were several major limitations:




    • There was only a 6 mm Hg difference pressure between groups in achieved blood, averaging 144 mm Hg with intensive lowering versus 150 with standard care in the first 24 hours.

    • Most strokes were mild to moderate and few cases involved symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage or proceeded to endovascular therapy.

    • The open-label design left the potential for bias.

    • Generalizability was questionable because most participants were from China and elsewhere in Asia, where intracranial atheroma and cerebral small vessel disease are bigger concerns than elsewhere in the world.


    Mortality, poor outcome, length of stay, and overall serious adverse events were similar between groups.


    The researchers concluded that Although intensive blood pressure lowering is safe, the observed reduction in intracranial haemorrhage did not lead to improved clinical outcome compared with guideline treatment.




    DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30038-8



    blood pressureCraig S AndersonECHANTED trialhigh blood pressureHypertensonischemic strokeLancetmodified Rankin Scalestrokesystolic

    Disclaimer: This site is primarily intended for healthcare professionals. Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement or prescription. Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. © 2020 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd

    Deepanjana Sarkar
    Deepanjana Sarkar
      Show Full Article
      Next Story
      Similar Posts
      NO DATA FOUND

      • Email: info@medicaldialogues.in
      • Phone: 011 - 4372 0751

      Website Last Updated On : 12 Oct 2022 7:06 AM GMT
      Company
      • About Us
      • Contact Us
      • Our Team
      • Reach our Editor
      • Feedback
      • Submit Article
      Ads & Legal
      • Advertise
      • Advertise Policy
      • Terms and Conditions
      • Privacy Policy
      • Editorial Policy
      • Comments Policy
      • Disclamier
      Medical Dialogues is health news portal designed to update medical and healthcare professionals but does not limit/block other interested parties from accessing our general health content. The health content on Medical Dialogues and its subdomains is created and/or edited by our expert team, that includes doctors, healthcare researchers and scientific writers, who review all medical information to keep them in line with the latest evidence-based medical information and accepted health guidelines by established medical organisations of the world.

      Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement or prescription.Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. You can check out disclaimers here. © 2025 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd

      © 2025 - Medical Dialogues. All Rights Reserved.
      Powered By: Hocalwire
      X
      We use cookies for analytics, advertising and to improve our site. You agree to our use of cookies by continuing to use our site. To know more, see our Cookie Policy and Cookie Settings.Ok