7. Additional SoF table: one antihypertensive agent compared to another antihypertensive agent for asymptomatic carotid stenosis.
| One antihypertensive agent compared to another antihypertensive agenta for asymptomatic carotid stenosis | |||||
|
Patient or population: asymptomatic carotid stenosis Setting: outpatients Intervention: one antihypertensive agent Comparison: another antihypertensive agent | |||||
|
Outcomes (measurement/time point) |
№ of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Anticipated absolute effects | |
| Risk with another antihypertensive agent | Risk difference with one antihypertensive agent | ||||
| Neurological impairment | The included studies did not measure this outcome. | ||||
| Ipsilateral major or disabling stroke (review meeting/semi‐annualb; review meeting/3 timesc) | 2918 (2 RCTs)d | ⨁⨁◯◯ Lowe | RR 0.99 (0.34 to 2.87) | 12 per 1000 | 0 fewer per 1000 (8 fewer to 22 more) |
| Stroke‐related mortality | The included studies did not measure this outcome. | ||||
| Major bleeding | The included studies did not measure this outcome. | ||||
| Progression of carotid stenosis | The included studies did not measure this outcome. | ||||
| Adverse events (only reported for two studies: one used review meeting/semi‐annualb; the other used review meeting/3 timesc) | 3239 (4 RCTs)f | ⨁⨁◯◯ Lowe | RR 1.00 (0.82 to 1.21) | 136 per 1000 | 0 fewer per 1000 (24 fewer to 29 more) |
| Quality of life | The included studies did not measure this outcome. | ||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; №: number; RCT: randomised controlled trial;RR: risk ratio; SoF: summary of findings | |||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | |||||
aFour studies included in this comparison bApplegate 1991 cELSA 2002 dIsrapidin versus hydrochlorothiazide; lacidipine versus atenolol eDowngraded two levels due to imprecision: few events, few studies, and 95% CI consistent with possible benefit and possible harm fIsrapidin versus hydrochlorothiazide; lacidipine versus atenolol; olmesartan versus atenolol; amlodipine versus lisinopril