Intervention Review

Treatment of hypertension in peripheral arterial disease

  1. Deirdre A Lane,
  2. Gregory YH Lip*

Editorial Group: Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group

Published Online: 4 DEC 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 19 MAR 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003075.pub3

How to Cite

Lane DA, Lip GYH. Treatment of hypertension in peripheral arterial disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD003075. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003075.pub3.

Author Information

  1. University of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK

*Gregory YH Lip, University of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Dudley Road, Birmingham, B18 7QH, UK. g.y.h.lip@bham.ac.uk.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 4 DEC 2013

SEARCH

 

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Plain language summary

Background

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) causes considerable morbidity and mortality. Hypertension is a risk factor for PAD. Treatment for hypertension must be compatible with the symptoms of PAD. Controversy regarding the effects of beta-adrenoreceptor blockade for hypertension in patients with PAD has led many physicians to stop prescribing beta-adrenoreceptor blockers. Little is known about the effects of other classes of anti-hypertensive drugs in the presence of PAD. This is the second update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003.

Objectives

To determine the effects of anti-hypertensive drugs in patients with both raised blood pressure and symptomatic PAD in terms of the rate of cardiovascular events and death, symptoms of claudication and critical leg ischaemia, and progression of atherosclerotic PAD as measured by ankle brachial index (ABI) changes and the need for revascularisation (reconstructive surgery or angioplasty) or amputation.

Search methods

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Specialised Register (last searched March 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 2).

Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least one anti-hypertensive treatment against placebo or two anti-hypertensive medications against each other, with interventions lasting at least one month. Trials had to include patients with symptomatic PAD.

Data collection and analysis

Data were extracted by one author (DAL) and checked by the other (GYHL). Potentially eligible studies were excluded when the results presentation prevented adequate extraction of data and enquiries to authors did not yield raw data.

Main results

Eight RCTs were included with a total of 3610 PAD patients. Four studies compared a recognised class of anti-hypertensive treatment with placebo and four studies compared two anti-hypertensive treatments with each other. Studies were not pooled due to the variation of the comparisons and the outcomes presented. Overall the quality of the available evidence was unclear, primarily as a result of a lack of detail in the study reports on the randomisation and blinding procedures and incomplete outcome data. Two studies compared angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors against placebo. In one study there was a significant reduction in the number of cardiovascular events in patients receiving ramipril (odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.91; n = 1725). In the second trial using perindopril (n = 52) there was a marginal increase in claudication distance but no change in ABI and a reduction in maximum walking distance. A trial comparing the calcium antagonist verapamil versus placebo in patients undergoing angioplasty (n = 96) suggested that verapamil reduced restenosis (per cent diameter stenosis (± SD) 48.0% ± 11.5 versus 69.6% ± 12.2; P < 0.01), although this was not reflected in the maintenance of a high ABI (0.76 ± 0.10 versus 0.72 ± 0.08 for verapamil versus placebo). Another study (n = 80) demonstrated no significant difference in arterial intima-media thickness (IMT) in men receiving the thiazide diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) compared to those receiving the alpha-adrenoreceptor blocker doxazosin (-0.12 ± 0.14 mm and -0.08 ± 0.13 mm, respectively; P = 0.66). A study (n = 36) comparing telmisartan to placebo found a significant improvement in maximum walking distance at 12 months with telmisartan (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 191 m (157 to 226) versus 103 m (76 to 164); P < 0.001) but no differences in ABI (median (IQR) 0.60 (0.60 to 0.77) versus 0.52 (0.48 to 0.67)) or arterial IMT (median (IQR) 0.08 cm (0.07 to 0.09) versus 0.09 cm (0.08 to 0.10)). Two studies compared the beta-adrenoreceptor blocker nebivolol with either the thiazide diuretic HCTZ or with metoprolol. Both studies found no significant differences in intermittent or absolute claudication distance, ABI, or all-cause mortality between the anti-hypertensives. A subgroup analysis of PAD patients (n = 2699) in a study which compared a calcium antagonist-based strategy (verapamil slow release (SR) ± trandolapril) to a beta-adrenoreceptor blocker-based strategy (atenolol ± hydrochlorothiazide) found no significant differences in the composite endpoints of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke with or without revascularisation (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.07 and OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13, respectively).

Authors' conclusions

Evidence on the use of various anti-hypertensive drugs in people with PAD is poor so that it is unknown whether significant benefits or risks accrue. However, lack of data specifically examining outcomes in PAD patients should not detract from the overwhelming evidence on the benefit of treating hypertension and lowering blood pressure.

 

Plain language summary

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Plain language summary

Treatment of high blood pressure for people with peripheral arterial disease

When blood pressure is consistently high it can lead to complications such as a heart attack (myocardial infarction) or stroke. Both peripheral arterial disease (PAD), a condition that affects the blood vessels (arteries) carrying the blood to the legs, arms, and stomach area, and high blood pressure (hypertension) are associated with atherosclerosis. This is hardening of the arteries which is caused by deposits of fat, cholesterol and other substances inside the blood vessels. PAD is diagnosed when the blood supply to the legs is restricted causing pain and cramping that limits walking (intermittent claudication). It is measured by the walking distance (on a treadmill) before onset of pain (claudication distance) or ankle brachial index (ABI), the ratio of the blood pressure in the arms to the blood pressure in the legs. If the blood pressure is lower in the legs compared to the arms (ABI of less than 1.0) this indicates blocked arteries in the legs (or PAD). PAD can progress to pain at rest and critical limb ischaemia (sudden lack of blood flow to a limb caused by a blood clot or fatty deposit blockage) that requires revascularisation (restoring the blood flow by opening up the blocked blood vessel) or amputation. Treatment of hypertension to reduce cardiovascular events (heart attack or stroke) and death needs careful consideration in people with PAD. Anti-hypertensive medications may worsen the PAD symptoms by further reducing blood flow and supply of oxygen to the limbs, and may have long-term effects on disease progression. The evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the risks and benefits of various anti-hypertensive drugs on measures of PAD is lacking.

We identified eight RCTs with a total of 3610 people with symptomatic PAD where participants were randomised to receive an anti-hypertensive treatment for at least one month or placebo or no treatment. Four studies compared an anti-hypertensive treatment with placebo and four studies compared two anti-hypertensive treatments with each other. The studies were not combined due to the variation of comparisons and the outcomes presented. One trial with 1725 participants showed that the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor ramipril was effective in reducing the number of cardiovascular events by 28% compared to placebo. In one other study using an ACE inhibitor (n = 52) the perindopril group showed a small increase in claudication distance but no change in ABI and a reduction in maximal walking distance (MWD). In patients undergoing peripheral arterial angioplasty (a procedure to open narrowed or blocked blood vessels) the results from a trial with 96 participants suggested that the calcium channel blocker verapamil reduced restenosis (new blockage of the artery) at six months. In one small study (n = 80) peripheral arterial wall thickness was similar whether men received the thiazide diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or the alpha-adrenoreceptor blocker doxazosin. In another small study (n = 36) MWD was improved at 12 months in the angiotensin-II receptor antagonist telmisartan group compared to the placebo group but there were no significant differences in ABI or arterial wall thickness. Another study (n = 163) found no significant differences in intermittent or absolute claudication distance, ABI, all-cause mortality or non-fatal cardiovascular events after 24 weeks of treatment in the beta-adrenoreceptor blocker nebivolol group and the HCTZ group. A study comparing two beta-adrenoreceptor blockers, nebivolol and metoprolol, found no clear differences in intermittent or absolute claudication distance, ABI, all-cause mortality or revascularisation after 36 weeks of treatment. A subgroup analysis of PAD patients (n = 2699) in the final study revealed no significant differences in the combined endpoints of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke with or without revascularisation between the calcium antagonist-based strategy (verapamil slow release (SR) with or without trandolapril) compared to the beta-adrenoreceptor blocker strategy (atenolol with or without HCTZ).

The evidence on the use of various anti-hypertensive drugs in people with PAD is poor so that it is not known whether significant benefits or risks accrue. However, lack of data specifically examining outcomes in hypertensive PAD patients should not detract from the overwhelming evidence on the benefit of treating hypertension and lowering blood pressure.