Abstract 11854: Intensive vs Standard Blood-Pressure Control ni Individuals With Polyvascular Disease

Abstract

Introduction: In the SPRINT trial, intensive blood pressure control reduced all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular events. However, it is unclear whether individuals with polyvascular disease, compared to individuals without established atherosclerosis, similarly benefit from intensive blood pressure control. Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the SPRINT trial to determine the efficacy of intensive versus standard blood pressure control on the primary composite outcome (myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death); and secondary outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction). Individuals were stratified by severity of atherosclerosis: no known atherosclerotic disease (Framingham Risk Score > 15%), subclinical atherosclerosis, symptomatic single-bed atherosclerosis, and symptomatic polyvascular atherosclerosis. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression models were used to compute the crude and adjusted hazard ratios. Interaction between intensive vs standard blood pressure control and atherosclerotic burden was evaluated. Results: In the SPRINT trial, 6,837 individuals had elevated Framingham Risk Score, 128 had subclinical atherosclerosis, 1,207 had symptomatic single-bed atherosclerosis, and 254 had symptomatic polyvascular disease. There was graded increase in risk of primary composite outcome and secondary outcomes with more atherosclerotic burden, even when controlling for differences in baseline characteristics (Figure). There was no interaction among groups between treatment assignment and primary or secondary outcomes. Conclusions: This post-hoc analysis of SPRINT trial demonstrates a higher risk of adverse in patients with escalating atherosclerotic burden. Individuals derive benefit from intensive blood pressure control regardless of burden of atherosclerosis.