Higher versus lower blood pressure targets after cardiac arrest: Systematic review with individual patient data meta-analysis

Ville Niemelä, Faiza Siddiqui, Koen Ameloot, Matti Reinikainen, Johannes Grand, Johanna Hästbacka, Christian Hassager, Jesper Kjaergaard, Anders Åneman, Marjaana Tiainen, Niklas Nielsen, Markus Harboe Olsen, Caroline Kamp Jorgensen, Johanne Juul Petersen, Josef Dankiewicz, Manoj Saxena, Janus C. Jakobsen, Markus B. Skrifvars

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


Purpose: Guidelines recommend targeting mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 65 mmHg in patients after cardiac arrest (CA). Recent trials have studied the effects of targeting a higher MAP as compared to a lower MAP after CA. We performed a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the effects of higher versus lower MAP targets on patient outcome. Method: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, CINAHL, Scopus, the Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, Google Scholar and the Turning Research into Practice database to identify trials randomizing patients to higher (≥71 mmHg) or lower (≤70 mmHg) MAP targets after CA and resuscitation. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2 (RoB 2) to assess for risk of bias. The primary outcomes were 180-day all-cause mortality and poor neurologic recovery defined by a modified Rankin score of 4–6 or a cerebral performance category score of 3–5. Results: Four eligible clinical trials were identified, randomizing a total of 1,087 patients. All the included trials were assessed as having a low risk for bias. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval for 180-day all-cause mortality for a higher versus a lower MAP target was 1.08 (0.92–1.26) and for poor neurologic recovery 1.01 (0.86–1.19). Trial sequential analysis showed that a 25% or higher treatment effect, i.e., RR < 0.75, can be excluded. No difference in serious adverse events was found between the higher and lower MAP groups. Conclusions: Targeting a higher MAP compared to a lower MAP is unlikely to reduce mortality or improve neurologic recovery after CA. Only a large treatment effect above 25% (RR < 0.75) could be excluded, and future studies are needed to investigate if relevant but lower treatment effect exists. Targeting a higher MAP was not associated with any increase in adverse effects.

Original languageEnglish
Article number109862
Publication statusPublished - 2023

Subject classification (UKÄ)

  • Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Free keywords

  • Blood pressure
  • Cardiac arrest
  • Meta-analysis
  • Systematic review
  • Target


Dive into the research topics of 'Higher versus lower blood pressure targets after cardiac arrest: Systematic review with individual patient data meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this