TY - JOUR
T1 - Chlorthalidone compared with hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular events
T2 - Systematic review and network meta-analyses
AU - Roush, George C.
AU - Holford, Theodore R.
AU - Guddati, Achuta K.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2012/6
Y1 - 2012/6
N2 - Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) is widely used for hypertension, and prescriptions for HCTZ outnumber those for chlorthalidone (CTDN) by >20-fold in 2 recent surveys. Some have recently expressed a preference for CTDN. However, head-to-head trials testing the effect of the 2 drugs on cardiovascular events (CVEs) are lacking. We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials in which 1 arm was based on either HCTZ or CTDN followed by 2 types of network meta-analyses, a drug-adjusted analysis and an office systolic blood pressure-adjusted analysis. Nine trials were identified: 3 based on HCTZ and 6 based on CTDN. In the drug-adjusted analysis (n=50946), the percentage of risk reduction in congestive heart failure for CTDN versus HCTZ was 23 (95% CI, 2-39; P=0.032); and in all CVEs was 21 (95% CI, 12-28; P<0.0001). In the office systolic blood pressure-adjusted analysis (n=78350), the percentage of risk reduction in CVEs for CTDN versus HCTZ was 18 (95% CI, 3-30; P=0.024). When the reduction in office systolic blood pressure was identical in the 2 arms, the risk for CVEs in HCTZ arms was 19% higher than in its nondiuretic comparator arms (P=0.021). Relative to HCTZ, the number needed to treat with CTDN to prevent 1 CVE over 5 years was 27. In conclusion, CTDN is superior to HCTZ in preventing cardiovascular events. This cannot be attributed entirely to the lesser effect of HCTZ on office systolic blood pressure but may be attributed to the pleomorphic effects of alternative medications or to the short duration of action of HCTZ.
AB - Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) is widely used for hypertension, and prescriptions for HCTZ outnumber those for chlorthalidone (CTDN) by >20-fold in 2 recent surveys. Some have recently expressed a preference for CTDN. However, head-to-head trials testing the effect of the 2 drugs on cardiovascular events (CVEs) are lacking. We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials in which 1 arm was based on either HCTZ or CTDN followed by 2 types of network meta-analyses, a drug-adjusted analysis and an office systolic blood pressure-adjusted analysis. Nine trials were identified: 3 based on HCTZ and 6 based on CTDN. In the drug-adjusted analysis (n=50946), the percentage of risk reduction in congestive heart failure for CTDN versus HCTZ was 23 (95% CI, 2-39; P=0.032); and in all CVEs was 21 (95% CI, 12-28; P<0.0001). In the office systolic blood pressure-adjusted analysis (n=78350), the percentage of risk reduction in CVEs for CTDN versus HCTZ was 18 (95% CI, 3-30; P=0.024). When the reduction in office systolic blood pressure was identical in the 2 arms, the risk for CVEs in HCTZ arms was 19% higher than in its nondiuretic comparator arms (P=0.021). Relative to HCTZ, the number needed to treat with CTDN to prevent 1 CVE over 5 years was 27. In conclusion, CTDN is superior to HCTZ in preventing cardiovascular events. This cannot be attributed entirely to the lesser effect of HCTZ on office systolic blood pressure but may be attributed to the pleomorphic effects of alternative medications or to the short duration of action of HCTZ.
KW - Cardiovascular diseases
KW - Chlorthalidone/therapeutic use
KW - Hydrochlorothiazide/therapeutic use
KW - Hypertension
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Randomized controlled trials
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861531899&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861531899&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.191106
DO - 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.191106
M3 - Article
C2 - 22526259
AN - SCOPUS:84861531899
SN - 0194-911X
VL - 59
SP - 1110
EP - 1117
JO - Hypertension
JF - Hypertension
IS - 6
ER -