Figures
Abstract
Objectives
Quantitative associations between prehypertension or its two separate blood pressure (BP) ranges and cardiovascular disease (CVD) or all-cause mortality have not been reliably documented. In this study, we performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess these relationships from prospective cohort studies.
Methods
We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed (1966-June 2012) and the Cochrane Library (1988-June 2012) without language restrictions. This was supplemented by review of the references in the included studies and relevant reviews identified in the search. Prospective studies were included if they reported multivariate-adjusted relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of CVD or all-cause mortality with respect to prehypertension or its two BP ranges (low range: 120–129/80–84 mmHg; high range: 130–139/85–89 mmHg) at baseline. Pooled RRs were estimated using a random-effects model or a fixed-effects model depending on the between-study heterogeneity.
Results
Thirteen studies met our inclusion criteria, with 870,678 participants. Prehypertension was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality either in the whole prehypertension group (RR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.15, P = 0.667) or in its two separate BP ranges (low-range: RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.02, P = 0.107; high range: RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.06, P = 0.951). Prehypertension was significantly associated with a greater risk of CVD mortality (RR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.50, P<0.001). When analyzed separately by two BP ranges, only high range prehypertension was related to an increased risk of CVD mortality (low-range: RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.30, P = 0.287; high range: RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.41, P<0.001).
Citation: Guo X, Zhang X, Zheng L, Guo L, Li Z, Yu S, et al. (2013) Prehypertension Is Not Associated with All-Cause Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies. PLoS ONE 8(4): e61796. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061796
Editor: James M. Wright, University of British Columbia, Canada
Received: November 2, 2012; Accepted: March 13, 2013; Published: April 25, 2013
Copyright: © 2013 Guo et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The authors have no support or funding to report.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
High blood pressure (BP) is the leading cause of disease burden worldwide [1]. Suboptimal BP is responsible for a huge economic and health burden in both developed and developing countries [2]. Worldwide, more than seven million premature deaths can be attributed directly or indirectly to hypertension [3]. Complications of hypertension affect life quality substantially because many crucial organs, such as heart, brain and kidney, are involved and damaged. It has become an important public-health challenge to the world since the number of hypertensive people is extremely large [4].
The association between high BP and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality is well established [5]–[7]. BP is strongly related to vascular mortality, down to at least 115/75 mm Hg [5]. The seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) timely updated the BP category, coming up with the concept of prehypertension for better management [8]. Numerous studies emerged afterward to investigate the risk of prehypertension for various types of adverse outcomes, including stroke, coronary heart disease, and CVD and all-cause mortality [9]–[13].
Risk of mortality provides evidence for the prevention and treatment strategies of prehypertension. Since the ultimate public health goal of antihypertensive therapy is to reduce cardiovascular or total mortality, it is important to recognize first how risky prehypertension is for CVD or total death. Although a few studies pertaining to this issue exist, the conclusion has been compromised by the inconsistent results. It is difficult to assess this issue in a single study due to limited events. To our knowledge, there has been no quantitative analysis conducted to investigate the relationship between prehypertension and CVD or all-cause mortality from the literature worldwide. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to characterize the magnitude of these associations on a prospective level.
Materials and Methods
Literature Search
We performed and reported a systematic review of the published literature according to the recommendations of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Group [14] and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) Statement [15]. We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed (1966-June 2012) and the Cochrane Library (1988-June 2012) without language restrictions. Search terms including MeSH words and text words were related to exposure (“prehypertensi*” or "high normal blood pressure") and to outcomes (“mortality”, “survival”, “death” or “fatal”). Two authors (Guo X and Zhang XY) independently screened the studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. In addition, we manually searched the references in the articles chosen for data abstraction and in the relevant reviews identified in the search. If the articles did not contain all of the necessary information, we contacted the authors for any possible additional published or unpublished data.
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
For inclusion, studies had to meet the following criteria: (1) original article, prospective cohort design; (2) assessment of prehypertension or high normal BP as baseline exposure; (3) assessment of CVD mortality or all-cause mortality as outcome; (4) follow-up of at least 5 years, and (5) reported association measures [relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI)] from the multivariate-adjusted analyses between exposure and outcomes with normal BP as reference. Multiple samples with different gender, age or ethnic groups based on the same population were also included. If multiple reports from the same study were identified, we used the one with the most detailed information and supplemented it.
Studies were excluded if they met the following criteria: (1) no original data (reviews, comments); (2) only unadjusted or age- and gender-adjusted RR or HR was reported; (3) duplicated studies; (4) not conducted in human, and (5) data were derived from secondary analysis of clinical trials.
Data Extraction
Using a standardized data extraction form, two investigators (Guo L and Li Z) extracted the data independently with discrepancies resolved by an additional reviewer (Zheng L) and through discussion. Information extracted included first author’s name, publication year, country, sample characteristics, prevalence of prehypertension, follow-up, definition of high BP, adjusted variables, outcome assessment, and multivariate-adjusted RRs or HRs and corresponding 95% CIs. An electronic abstraction database was created in Microsoft Excel.
Assessment of Study Quality
According to the guidelines developed by the US Preventive Task Force and the modified checklist used in previous studies [16]–[18], we assessed quality of all articles that met the selection criteria with the following eight items: (1) prospective study design; (2) maintenance of comparable groups; (3) adjustment of potential confounders; (4) documented loss of follow-up rate; (5) outcome assessed blind to exposure status; (6) clear and proper definition of exposures (prehypertension) and outcomes (CVD and all-cause mortality); (7) temporality (BP measured at baseline, not at time of outcomes assessment) and (8) follow-up of at least one year. Studies were graded as of good quality if they met 7 to 8 criteria; fair if they met 4 to 6; and poor if they met fewer than 4 criteria.
Statistical Analyses
Prehypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 120–139 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at 80–89 mmHg, with two BP ranges further divided (i.e. low range: SBP 120–129 mmHg or DBP 80–84 mmHg and high range: SBP 130–139 mmHg or DBP 85–89 mmHg). Normal BP (SBP<120 mmHg and DBP<80 mmHg) was taken as the reference category for RRs. Outcome assessment was the relative risk of CVD and all-cause mortality in the low-range and high-range prehypertension categories, respectively or in the whole prehypertensive range.
To estimate quantitative associations between prehypertension and the mortality outcomes, we obtained pooled estimates basing on the multivariate-adjusted RRs or HRs with 95% CIs from included studies. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated by Q-statistic and quantified by the I2 statistic. I2 statistic of 0%–40% indicates unimportant heterogeneity, 30%–60% indicates moderate heterogeneity, 50%–90% indicates substantial heterogeneity, and 75%–100% indicates considerable heterogeneity [19]. If statistically significant heterogeneity was considered present (P<0.1 and I2>50%), we chose a random-effects model, otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the heterogeneity according to average age (<65 years vs. ≥65 years), gender (men vs. women), location (Asian vs. non-Asian), sample size (<10000 vs. ≥10000), follow-up (<10 years vs. ≥10 years) and study quality (good vs. fair). Possible publication bias was evaluated visually using funnel plots and statistically by Begg’s and Egger’s tests. Sensitivity analysis was used to examine the influence of individual studies to see the extent to which inferences depend on a particular study or group of studies. All analyses were performed using the statistical package Stata version 11.0.
Results
Search Results
A total of 1022 papers were identified from the initial database search, of which 984 were excluded following review of the title and abstract. The large majority of articles were excluded because they were not relevant to the issue we aimed to evaluate. Among the retrieved 38 articles, 13 cohort studies met our inclusion criteria, with 870,678 participants [20]–[32]. Figure 1 provides a diagram of the selection process and reasons for exclusion.
Study Characteristics
Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the individual studies. The included studies varied in sample size from 2376 [31] to 347,978 [21]. All but three of the studies [21], [22], [28] included both men and women. Follow-up ranged from 5 to 25 years. Five of the studies were conducted in the United States, two each in China, Korea and Japan, and one each in India and Singapore. We restricted the inclusion criteria to prospective studies with at least a minimum of 5 years follow-up to ensure a reliable conclusion. Eight of the included articles had good study quality.
Prehypertension and All-cause Mortality
In the pooled analysis from 8 populations, both low-range and high-range prehypertension were not associated with a greater risk of all-cause mortality (low-range: RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.02, P = 0.107; high range: RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.06, P = 0.951) (Figure 2a and b). Seven studies investigated the association between the whole range of prehypertension and all-cause mortality, the pooled result of which showed that prehypertension was not related to a greater risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.15, P = 0.667), with some heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 46.5%, P = 0.07) (Figure 3).
Low range prehypertension: 120–129/80–84 mmHg; high range prehypertension: 130–139/85–89 mmHg. CI: confidence interval.
CI: confidence interval.
Prehypertension and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality
Seven studies with nine populations evaluated the risk of low-range and high-range prehypertension for CVD mortality separately. Only high range prehypertension was associated with an increased risk of CVD mortality (low-range: RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.30, P = 0.287; high range: RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.41, P<0.001) (Figure 4a and b). Among the whole range prehypertensive populations, the risk of CVD mortality was also increased (RR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.50, P<0.001) (Figure 5), with some heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 74.4%, P<0.001).
Low range prehypertension: 120–129/80–84 mmHg; high range prehypertension: 130–139/85–89 mmHg. CI: confidence interval; CVD: cardiovascular disease.
CI: confidence interval; CVD: cardiovascular disease.
Sources of Heterogeneity
Table 2 shows the further analyses stratified by various population groups in each range of prehypertension. The heterogeneity of effect was due to differences in gender, age, follow-up or study quality. No publication bias was observed (Begg’s test all P>0.05; Egger’s test all P>0.05, figures not shown). The sensitivity analysis showed that the omission of any of the studies from the analysis did not alter the overall finding.
Discussion
The present study provided for the first time a comprehensive review of the literature and quantitative estimates of prospective associations between prehypertension and CVD and all-cause mortality. We found that prehypertension, including both ranges, was not associated with all-cause mortality. The positive association between prehypertension and the risk of CVD mortality was confined to the high range BP group when analyzed by two ranges separately. The effects of prehypertension on mortality differed by many factors, such as age group, sample size and study quality.
A high prevalence of prehypertension was observed in many areas of the world [33]–[36]. In the United States, the overall prevalence of prehypertension was approximately 31% according to the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) [37], and 3 of 8 adults had low range prehypertension and 1 of 8 adults had high range prehypertension from 2005 to 2006 [38]. Considering this large population and the high progression rate from prehypertension to hypertension, the burden is large.
A previous meta-analysis of 61 prospective studies indicated that the risk of cardiovascular mortality began to increase from BP values of 115/75 mmHg, and doubled for each 20 mmHg rise in SBP and 10 mmHg rise in DBP among 40–69-year-olds [5], suggesting that a BP range of 115–140/75–90 mmHg might also cause adverse outcomes and merits attention. In the present study, we quantitatively estimated that the risk of CVD mortality was increased ∼1.3-fold in the prehypertensive range compared to normal BP, the risk ratio of which was lower than the result by Lewington et al [5]. This might be explained by the various age groups included. When the data were analyzed by two BP ranges separately, we found that only high range prehypertension was related to a greater risk of CVD mortality. Although the relatively small number of deaths in the low range BP group is an alternative explanation, this is in accordance with the higher risk of CVD morbidity or mortality in the BP range of 130–139/85–89 mmHg described in previous studies [39]–[41], underscoring the differences between the two BP ranges of prehypertension.
Interestingly, we found that there was no relationship between prehypertension or either of its two ranges and all-cause mortality. Although a previous pooled study of Japanese subjects indicated that prehypertension was significantly associated with all-cause mortality following multivariate-adjustment, the positive result was mild and limited to only two decades of age [42]. There might exists an age- or gender-specific relationship which our study failed to reach, but it seems plausible that there is no real association between prehypertension and all-cause mortality.
We assumed that the inconsistent results between CVD mortality and all-cause mortality we observed in the present study might be caused by the different data set included in the two analyzing groups. Previous studies showed that the relation of BP to CVD mortality or all-cause mortality was closely associated with age [5], [42]. Although the studies we included were all age-adjusted, the different age distributions in the two analyzing data set may still have an effect on the outcomes. In addition, there were many other causes of mortality, such as cancer or accidental death, which might decrease in proportion to CVD mortality. For example, Terry et al reported that the rate of all external death was 4.95% in normal BP group, compared to a lower one of 4.47% in prehypertension group [21].
Lifestyle modifications have been shown to effectively lower BP and are regarded as the first choice for prehypertension management. Although a few studies have demonstrated good efficacy and safety of antihypertensive treatment for prehypertension [43]–[45], it is not known whether the benefits of pharmacological therapy outweigh the harms. Our data provide evidence for the establishment of prevention and treatment strategies of prehypertension. Different effects of two BP ranges in prehypertension on future outcomes should be fully considered.
There are limitations in the present study that merit discussion. First, the contributing studies varied in their initial exclusion criteria and their inclusion of adjustment confounders. Although we only included multivariate-adjusted studies to minimize the impact, it remains a possibility that residual confounding across the studies caused overestimation of the associations. Second, since individual patient data or original data were unavailable, our intent to do more detailed relevant analyses, such as analysis by each decade of age, was restricted. In addition, a delay between search and publication was inevitable. Although our literature search was extensive, there still was a possibility of omission.
Conclusions
From the best available prospective data, prehypertension was not associated with all-cause mortality. More high quality cohort studies stratified by BP range are needed. Different effects of two ranges in prehypertension on future outcomes should be fully considered when making prevention and treatment strategies.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the research: YS JL XG. Screened the studies: XG Xiaoyu Zhang L. Zheng. Extracted the data: LG ZL L. Zheng. Assessed study quality: L. Zou Xingang Zhang ZS JL. Analyzed the data: XG SY HY Xinghu Zhou. Wrote the paper: XG Xiaoyu Zhang YS.
References
- 1. Ezzati M, Lopez AD, Rodgers A, Hoorn SV, Murray CJL, et al. (2002) Selected major risk factors and global and regional burden of disease. Lancet 360: 1347–1360.
- 2. Gaziano TA, Bitton A, Anand S, Weinstein MC (2009) International Society of Hypertension (2009) The global cost of nonoptimal blood pressure. J Hypertens 27(7): 1472–1477.
- 3. Lawes CM, Vander Hoorn S, Rodgers A (2008) International Society of Hypertension (2008) Global burden of blood-pressure-related disease, 2001. Lancet 371: 1513–1518.
- 4. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, et al. (2005) Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet 365: 217–223.
- 5. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R, et al. (2002) 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 360: 1903–1913.
- 6. He FJ, MacGregor GA (2003) Cost of poor blood pressure control in the UK: 62, 000 unnecessary deaths per year. J Hum Hypertens 17: 455–457.
- 7. He J, Gu D, Chen J, Wu X, Kelly TN, et al. (2009) Premature deaths attributable to blood pressure in China: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 374(9703): 1765–1772.
- 8. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, et al. (2003) Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 42: 1206–1252.
- 9. Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, Evans JC, O’Donnell CJ, et al. (2001) Impact of high-normal blood pressure on the risk of cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 345(18): 1291–1297.
- 10. Asayama K, Ohkubo T, Kikuya M, Metoki H, Hoshi H, et al. (2004) Prediction of stroke by self-measurement of blood pressure at home versus casual screening blood pressure measurement in relation to the Joint National Committee 7 classification: the Ohasama study. Stroke 35(10): 2356–2361.
- 11. Kalaitzidis RG, Bakris GL (2010) Prehypertension: is it relevant for nephrologists? Kidney Int 77(3): 194–200.
- 12. Pimenta E, Oparil S (2010) Prehypertension: epidemiology, consequences and treatment. Nat Rev Nephrol 6(1): 21–30.
- 13. Carlsson AC, Theobald H, Hellénius ML, Wändell PE (2009) Cardiovascular and total mortality in men and women with different blood pressure levels–A 26-year follow-up. Blood Press 18(3): 105–110.
- 14. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, et al. (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283: 2008–2012.
- 15. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 21 6(7): e1000097.
- 16.
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, et al.. (2001) Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 20(3 Suppl): 21–35.
- 17. Smith GL, Lichtman JH, Bracken MB, Shlipak MG, Phillips CO, et al. (2006) Renal impairment and outcomes in heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 47(10): 1987–1996.
- 18. Lee M, Saver JL, Chang KH, Liao HW, Chang SC, et al. (2010) Impact of microalbuminuria on incident stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke 41(11): 2625–2631.
- 19.
Higgins JPT, Green S (2008) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane Collaboration.
- 20. Mainous AG 3rd, Everett CJ, Liszka H, King DE, Egan BM (2004) Prehypertension and mortality in a nationally representative cohort. Am J Cardiol 94(12): 1496–1500.
- 21. Terry PD, Abramson JL (2007) Neaton JD; MRFIT Research Group (2007) Blood pressure and risk of death from external causes among men screened for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Am J Epidemiol 165(3): 294–301.
- 22. Hsia J, Margolis KL, Eaton CB, Wenger NK, Allison M, et al. (2007) Prehypertension and cardiovascular disease risk in the Women’s Health Initiative. Circulation 115(7): 855–860.
- 23. Gu Q, Burt VL, Paulose-Ram R, Yoon S, Gillum RF (2008) High blood pressure and cardiovascular disease mortality risk among U.S. adults: the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey mortality follow-up study. Ann Epidemiol 18(4): 302–309.
- 24. Lee J, Heng D, Ma S, Chew SK, Hughes K, et al. (2009) Influence of pre-hypertension on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: the Singapore Cardiovascular Cohort Study. Int J Cardiol 135(3): 331–337.
- 25. Gu D, Chen J, Wu X, Duan X, Jones DW, et al. (2009) Prehypertension and risk of cardiovascular disease in Chinese adults. J Hypertens 27(4): 721–729.
- 26. Ikeda A, Iso H, Yamagishi K, Inoue M, Tsugane S (2009) Blood pressure and the risk of stroke, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality among Japanese: the JPHC Study. Am J Hypertens 22(3): 273–280.
- 27. Pednekar MS, Gupta R, Gupta PC (2009) Association of blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality in India: Mumbai cohort study. Am J Hypertens 22(10): 1076–1084.
- 28. Dorjgochoo T, Shu XO, Zhang X, Li H, Yang G, et al. (2009) Relation of blood pressure components and categories and all-cause, stroke and coronary heart disease mortality in urban Chinese women: a population-based prospective study. J Hypertens 27(3): 468–475.
- 29. Lorenzo C, Aung K, Stern MP, Haffner SM (2009) Pulse pressure, prehypertension, and mortality: the San Antonio heart study. Am J Hypertens 22(11): 1219–1226.
- 30. Hozawa A, Kuriyama S, Kakizaki M, Ohmori-Matsuda K, Ohkubo T, et al. (2009) Attributable risk fraction of prehypertension on cardiovascular disease mortality in the Japanese population: the Ohsaki Study. Am J Hypertens 22(3): 267–272.
- 31. Kim NH, Cho HJ, Kim YJ, Cho MJ, Choi HY, et al. (2011) Combined effect of high-normal blood pressure and low HDL cholesterol on mortality in an elderly Korean population: the South-West Seoul (SWS) study. Am J Hypertens 24(8): 918–923.
- 32. Gombojav B, Yi SW, Sull JW, Nam CM, Ohrr H (2011) Combined effects of cognitive impairment and hypertension on total mortality in elderly people: the Kangwha Cohort study.Gerontology. 57(6): 490–496.
- 33. Isezuo SA, Sabir AA, Ohwovorilole AE, Fasanmade OA (2011) Prevalence, associated factors and relationship between prehypertension and hypertension: a study of two ethnic African populations in Northern Nigeria. J Hum Hypertens 25 (4): 224–230.
- 34. Janghorbani M, Amini M, Gouya MM, Delavari A, Alikhani S, et al. (2008) Nationwide survey of prevalence and risk factors of prehypertension and hypertension in Iranian adults. J Hypertens 26(3): 419–426.
- 35. Sun Z, Zheng L, Wei Y, Li J, Zhang X, et al. (2007) Prevalence and risk factors of the rural adult people prehypertension status in Liaoning Province of China. Circ J 71(4): 550–553.
- 36. Gupta AK, McGlone M, Greenway FL, Johnson WD (2010) Prehypertension in disease-free adults: a marker for an adverse cardiometabolic risk profile. Hypertens Res 33(9): 905–910.
- 37. Wang Y, Wang QJ (2004) The prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension among US adults according to the new joint national committee guidelines: new challenges of the old problem. Arch Intern Med 164: 2126–2134.
- 38. Egan BM, Lackland DT, Jones DW (2010) Prehypertension: an opportunity for a new public health paradigm. Cardiol Clin 28(4): 561–569.
- 39. Vasan R, Larson MG, Leip EP, Kannel WB, Levy D (2002) Assessment of frequency of progression to hypertension in non-hypertensive participants in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort study. Lancet 358: 1682–1686.
- 40. Zhang H, Thijs L, Kuznetsova T, Fagard RH, Xinli L, et al. (2006) Progression to hypertension in the non-hypertensive participants in the Flemish Study on Environment, Genes and Health Outcomes. J Hypertens 24: 1719–1727.
- 41. Conen D, Ridker PM, Buring JE, Glynn RJ (2007) Risk of cardiovascular events among women with high normal blood pressure or blood pressure progression: prospective cohort study. BMJ 335: 432.
- 42. Murakami Y, Hozawa A, Okamura T, Ueshima H, Evidence for Cardiovascular Prevention From Observational Cohorts in Japan Research Group (EPOCH-JAPAN) (2008) Relation of blood pressure and all-cause mortality in 180,000 Japanese participants: pooled analysis of 13 cohort studies. Hypertension 51(6): 1483–1491.
- 43. Julius S, Nesbitt SD, Egan BM, Weber MA, Michelson EL, et al. (2006) Feasibility of treating prehypertension with an angiotensin-receptor blocker. N Engl J Med 354: 1685–1697.
- 44. Lüders S, Schrader J, Berger J, Unger T, Zidek W, et al. (2008) The PHARAO study: prevention of hypertension with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril in patients with high-normal blood pressure: a prospective, randomized, controlled prevention trial of the German Hypertension League. J Hypertens 26: 1487–1496.
- 45. Sipahi I, Swaminathan A, Natesan V, Debanne SM, Simon DI, et al. (2012) Effect of antihypertensive therapy on incident stroke in cohorts with prehypertensive blood pressure levels: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Stroke 43(2): 432–440.