Uthman Olalekan A, Al-Khudairy Lena, Nduka Chidozie, Court Rachel, Enderby Jodie, Anjorin Seun, Mistry Hema, Melendez-Torres G J, Taylor-Phillips Sian, Clarke Aileen
Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Aug;29(37):1-18. doi: 10.3310/KGFA8471.
Cardiovascular disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. This series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses synthesised evidence on the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for primary cardiovascular disease prevention.
Five systematic reviews and meta-analyses were conducted using rigorous methods, including comprehensive searches, duplicate screening, risk-of-bias assessments and adherence to reporting guidelines. An umbrella review summarised evidence from 95 systematic reviews. A machine learning study developed a parallel Convolutional Neural Network algorithm with 96.4% recall and 99.1% precision for study screening. A network meta-analysis compared preventive strategies across 139 trials (1,053,772 participants). Simulation modelling projected the population impact of policy interventions, and a cost-effectiveness review appraised eight United Kingdom-based economic evaluations.
The umbrella review found that antiplatelets reduced major cardiovascular disease events in 8/17 meta-analyses (relative risks 0.85-0.97), while statins reduced cardiovascular disease mortality (relative risks 0.71-0.89), all-cause mortality (relative risks 0.66-0.93) and major cardiovascular disease events (relative risks 0.59-0.90). sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors reduced major cardiovascular disease events by 8% (relative risk 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 0.95) and all-cause mortality by 6% (relative risk 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.98). Non-pharmacological interventions showed limited evidence, though vitamin D (relative risks 0.93-0.94) and dietary changes (relative risk 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 0.97) had some benefits. The network meta-analysis found that antihypertensives (relative risk 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.90), intensive blood pressure control (relative risk 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96), statins (relative risk 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.91) and multifactorial lifestyle interventions (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.92) significantly reduced composite cardiovascular disease events and mortality. Blood pressure lowering also reduced all-cause mortality (relative risk 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.94). Simulation modelling projected substantial population-level health gains. National salt reduction programmes could prevent 1900-48,000 cardiovascular disease deaths annually, while tobacco control initiatives could avert 15,500 deaths yearly. In the United Kingdom, salt reduction could prevent 4450 deaths annually, and transfat elimination could prevent 1700-3500 deaths yearly. Cost-effectiveness analyses found most interventions had incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. However, intensive diabetes treatment and enhanced motivational interviewing exceeded £55,000/quality-adjusted life-year, indicating low value for money.
Limitations included residual confounding, heterogeneity in simulation models and a lack of head-to-head trials for some interventions. More research is needed on non-pharmacological interventions, policy implementation and health economic analyses.
This series supports antihypertensives, statins and multifactorial lifestyle interventions as core strategies for primary cardiovascular disease prevention. Policy interventions show potential for large-scale impact, and most approaches are cost-effective. Future research should prioritise head-to-head trials, implementation studies and health economic analyses to optimise prevention efforts.
This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/148/05.
心血管疾病仍是全球发病和死亡的主要原因。这一系列系统评价和荟萃分析综合了关于药物和非药物干预措施对原发性心血管疾病预防的有效性、比较有效性和成本效益的证据。
采用严格方法进行了五项系统评价和荟萃分析,包括全面检索、重复筛选、偏倚风险评估以及遵循报告指南。一项汇总评价总结了95项系统评价的证据。一项机器学习研究开发了一种并行卷积神经网络算法,用于研究筛选的召回率为96.4%,精确率为99.1%。一项网状荟萃分析比较了139项试验(1053772名参与者)中的预防策略。模拟建模预测了政策干预对人群的影响,一项成本效益评价评估了八项基于英国的经济评估。
汇总评价发现,在17项荟萃分析中的8项中,抗血小板药物降低了主要心血管疾病事件(相对风险0.85 - 0.97),而他汀类药物降低了心血管疾病死亡率(相对风险0.71 - 0.89)、全因死亡率(相对风险0.66 - 0.93)和主要心血管疾病事件(相对风险0.59 - 0.90)。钠 - 葡萄糖转运蛋白2抑制剂使主要心血管疾病事件减少了8%(相对风险0.92,95%置信区间0.89至0.95),全因死亡率降低了6%(相对风险0.94,95%置信区间0.90至0.98)。非药物干预措施的证据有限,不过维生素D(相对风险0.93 - 0.94)和饮食改变(相对风险0.91,95%置信区间0.85至0.97)有一些益处。网状荟萃分析发现,抗高血压药物(相对风险0.76,95%置信区间0.64至0.90)、强化血压控制(相对风险0.66,95%置信区间0.46至0.96)、他汀类药物(相对风险0.81,95%置信区间0.71至0.91)和多因素生活方式干预(相对风险0.75,95%置信区间0.61至0.92)显著降低了复合心血管疾病事件和死亡率。降低血压也降低了全因死亡率(相对风险0.82,95%置信区间0.71至0.94)。模拟建模预测了人群层面的显著健康收益。国家减盐计划每年可预防1900 - 48000例心血管疾病死亡,而控烟举措每年可避免15500例死亡。在英国,减盐每年可预防4450例死亡,消除反式脂肪每年可预防1700 - 3500例死亡。成本效益分析发现,大多数干预措施的增量成本效益比低于每质量调整生命年20000 - 30000英镑。然而,强化糖尿病治疗和强化动机访谈超过了每质量调整生命年55000英镑,表明性价比低。
局限性包括残余混杂、模拟模型的异质性以及一些干预措施缺乏直接比较的试验。需要对非药物干预措施、政策实施和卫生经济分析进行更多研究。
本系列研究支持将抗高血压药物、他汀类药物和多因素生活方式干预作为原发性心血管疾病预防的核心策略。政策干预显示出具有大规模影响的潜力,并且大多数方法具有成本效益。未来的研究应优先进行直接比较试验、实施研究和卫生经济分析,以优化预防措施。
本概述展示了由英国国家卫生与保健研究机构(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助的独立研究,资助编号为17/148/05。