Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The discussions frequently employ technical language and references to specific trials like ACCORD and SPRINT, emphasizing that intensive blood-pressure control (below 120 mmHg) does not significantly reduce cardiovascular events in people with diabetes. Phrases such as 'not much benefit' and 'no significant difference' reflect a cautious tone, while mentions of adverse events like 'spikes in adverse events' indicate concern about potential harms. These aspects contribute to the overall perception that the study prompts reevaluation of treatment goals and highlights the complexity of managing hypertension in diabetic patients.
Most posts highlight the lack of significant benefits from intensive blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes, indicating a general consensus that the study challenges previous assumptions.
Posts show high curiosity, referencing multiple major trials (ACCORD, SPRINT) and discussing potential implications, demonstrating a strong engagement with the topic.
Many discussions reference specific data points, sub-group analyses, and comparisons between populations, indicating deep consideration of the study's nuances.
While some posts consider the clinical implications, the overall perception suggests the study influences ongoing debates about optimal blood pressure targets rather than urging immediate change.
ACCORD BP Patients: T2DM + CVD/risk factors Treatment: SBP<120 or 140 Intensive therapy did not significantly lower the rate of first MACE vs standard therapy (1.87 vs 2.09%) What BP should your patients target? #Cardiology @nejm Credit: @hsu_tingting https://t.co/MNYBBANfbO
T0e: Turning up the pressure, intensive BP lowering in T2D not only failed to significantly cut major outcomes but brought a spike in adverse events (SAE) and a 7% rise in all-cause mortality HR 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85–1.35) #NephJC https://t.co/Q3gNS60PxF https://t.co/rluDIVcYWC
• ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive BP control (systolic BP < 120 mmHg) did not confer protection against cardiovascular events/death compared to less aggressive management (sBP < 140). #meded https://t.co/SNiM9datua
15) The #ACCORD trial enrolled exclusively patients with #T2D but excluded those with #creatinine of >1.5 mg/dL. It showed that targeting an #SBP of <120 mmHg did not reduce primary composite #CV events but it reduced #stroke.
We have compelling data that patients with high risk cardiovascular disease should have a blood pressure lower than the US guidelines, unless they have a diabetes then maybe not. No DM: https://t.co/ERTPwhGFPL DM: https://t.co/IGjfR9Guiy https://t.co/i3rZ6XCDBT
T0c: ACCORD trial #NephJC ⚖️ Compared intensive BP lowering (<120 mmHg) vs. standard target (<140 mmHg) in T2D.
This video examines the evidence against aggressive blood pressure lowering in people with type 2 diabetes, highlighting potential risks and questioning the benefits of targeting systolic pressures of 120 mm Hg for…
Prof. Johannes Mann discusses target blood pressure values for individuals with elevated cardiovascular risk based on the STEP trial presented at the European Society of Cardiology. The conversation interprets results…
Tirzepatide is a treatment option showing effective weight loss in obesity. This podcast focuses on its role in reducing type 2 diabetes incidence and discusses recent findings on AF screening and related cardiology…
RT @NephJC: T0e: Turning up the pressure, intensive BP lowering in T2D not only failed to significantly cut major outcomes but brought a sp…
RT @NephJC: T0c: ACCORD trial #NephJC ⚖️ Compared intensive BP lowering (<120 mmHg) vs. standard target (<140 mmHg) in T2D.
T0e: Turning up the pressure, intensive BP lowering in T2D not only failed to significantly cut major outcomes but brought a spike in adverse events (SAE) and a 7% rise in all-cause mortality HR 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85–1.35) #NephJC https://t.co/Q3gNS60PxF https://t.co/rluDIVcYWC
T0c: ACCORD trial #NephJC ⚖️ Compared intensive BP lowering (<120 mmHg) vs. standard target (<140 mmHg) in T2D.
2/10 What did I miss? Until now studies such as SPRINT (without DM) & ACCORD (with DM), suggested how different populations may benefit differently from intensive BP control. #NephJC SPRINT: https://t.co/isYOAzbIS1 ACCORD: https://t.co/Q3gNS60PxF
RT @cardiomet_CE: 15) The #ACCORD trial enrolled exclusively patients with #T2D but excluded those with #creatinine of >1.5 mg/dL. It show…
15) The #ACCORD trial enrolled exclusively patients with #T2D but excluded those with #creatinine of >1.5 mg/dL. It showed that targeting an #SBP of <120 mmHg did not reduce primary composite #CV events but it reduced #stroke.
15) The #ACCORD trial enrolled exclusively patients with #T2D but excluded those with #creatinine of >1.5 mg/dL. It showed that targeting an #SBP of <120 mmHg did not reduce primary composite #CV events but it reduced #stroke.
Effects of Intensive Blood-Pressure Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus - https://t.co/ebb1ARKMaj https://t.co/vVtX0YxWoZ
RT @accpcardprn: ACCORD BP Patients: T2DM + CVD/risk factors Treatment: SBP<120 or 140 Intensive therapy did not significantly lower the r…
RT @accpcardprn: ACCORD BP Patients: T2DM + CVD/risk factors Treatment: SBP<120 or 140 Intensive therapy did not significantly lower the r…
ACCORD BP Patients: T2DM + CVD/risk factors Treatment: SBP<120 or 140 Intensive therapy did not significantly lower the rate of first MACE vs standard therapy (1.87 vs 2.09%) What BP should your patients target? #Cardiology @nejm Credit: @hsu_tingting https://t.co/MNYBBANfbO
@kevinnbass May well Depend on population. https://t.co/biiGglkPtO
@HDambhaMiller @kamleshkhunti @AmarPut @DSNforumUK @bananabeba @DLBHATTMD Mean age 62! Duration of DM 10yr. Original paper (https://t.co/fj04PYCS6c) showed non-sig⤴️ in syncope (0.5v0.21%). I've seen sub-group analysis of ACCORD-BONe suggesting⤵️ in fractures, although that was prob related to ⤴️ in use of thiazides.
Mean age was only 62! Duration of DM 10yr. Original paper (https://t.co/fj04PYCS6c) did show a non-sig ⤴️ in syncope (0.5%v0.21%). I have seen sub-group analysis from ACCORD-BONE that suggested a lower fracture rate in the intensive arm, but this is likely to ⤴️ in thiazide use.
@zaidkadwa in the ACCORD BP trial intensive BP control in DM patients < 120mmHg vs 140mmHg di not show significant differences in cardiovascular ououtcomes hence we should just aim for 140/90 mmHg https://t.co/OeVytxO3nC
Hypertension targets, should we go tighter because someone has diabetes? The evidence...
RT @nephondemand: • ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive B…
RT @kidney_boy: We have compelling data that patients with high risk cardiovascular disease should have a blood pressure lower than the US…
We have compelling data that patients with high risk cardiovascular disease should have a blood pressure lower than the US guidelines, unless they have a diabetes then maybe not. No DM: https://t.co/ERTPwhGFPL DM: https://t.co/IGjfR9Guiy https://t.co/i3rZ6XCDBT
(1/2)Trial of the day: ACCORD BP ACCORD Study Group. "Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus". The New England Journal of Medicine. 2010. 362(17):1575-1585. https://t.co/r8aODK0TGr #FOAMcards
RT @nephondemand: • ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive B…
RT @nephondemand: • ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive B…
RT @nephondemand: • ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive B…
• ACCORD https://t.co/vh8MkX3yeT In diabetic patients w/ excellent kidney function & hardly any albuminuria, aggressive BP control (systolic BP < 120 mmHg) did not confer protection against cardiovascular events/death compared to less aggressive management (sBP < 140). #meded https://t.co/SNiM9datua
In #type2diabetes, a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of <120mmHg did not decrease fatal and non-fatal major cardiovascular events vis-a-vis a SBP of <140 mmHg. #evidence #clinicaltrials https://t.co/MD9zC4rEwm
Who's @wccushman? Lead investigator of ACCORD Showed no improvement in mortality with SBP<120 in DM2. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1001286#t=articleTop #askasn