Next Article in Journal
Challenges in Treating Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease and Related Neuropathies: Current Management and Future Perspectives
Previous Article in Journal
Cerebrospinal Fluid IgM and Oligoclonal IgG Bands in Multiple Sclerosis: A Meta-Analysis of Prevalence and Prognosis
Previous Article in Special Issue
HIV Infection and Related Mental Disorders
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Brain Sciences
Volume 11
Issue 11
10.3390/brainsci11111445
brainsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Relationship between Arterial Hypertension with Cognitive Performance in Elderly. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

by
José Miguel Sánchez-Nieto
,
Uriel Dagoberto Rivera-Sánchez
and
Víctor Manuel Mendoza-Núñez
*
Research Unit on Gerontology, FES Zaragoza, National Autonomou, University of Mexico, Mexico City 04510, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2021, 11(11), 1445; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111445
Submission received: 4 October 2021 / Revised: 20 October 2021 / Accepted: 26 October 2021 / Published: 29 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Risk Factors of Neurocognitive Dysfunction)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Previous systematic reviews report that arterial hypertension (AHT) is associated with lower performance in cognition in the elderly. However, some studies show that with higher blood pressure, a better cognitive performance is obtained. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between AHT with cognitive performance in the elderly. Methods: the review involved a search on PubMed, Scopus and PsycINFO databases from January 1990 to March, 2020 to identify the relationship among AHT and cognitive performance in older people. Results: 1170 articles were identified, 136 complete papers were reviewed, a qualitative analysis of 26 studies and a quantitative analysis of eight studies were carried out. It was found that people with AHT have a lower performance in processing speed SMD = 0.40 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.54), working memory SMD = 0.28 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.41) in short-term memory and learning SMD = −0.27 (95% CI: −0.37, −0.17) and delayed recall SMD = −0.20 (95% CI: −0.35, −0.05). Only one study found that higher blood pressure was associated with better memory performance. Conclusion: Our results suggest that high blood pressure primarily affects processing speed, working memory, short-term memory and learning and delayed recall.

1. Introduction

Regular blood pressure is 120/80 mmHg. When it gets to 140/90 or more in a chronic manner, it is considered as high blood pressure or arterial hypertension (AHT) [1]. The American Heart Association and the American Heart College have proposed to reduce this diagnostic criterion to 130/80 mmHg [2]; however, the relevance for Latin America is still pending [3].
It is estimated that there are 1130 million people worldwide with AHT [1]. It is associated with other diseases like diabetes [4], cancer [5], psychosocial stress [6], dementia or cognitive impairment [7]. It has such relevance that AHT has been considered by a group of experts as the main modifiable factor from middle age on to prevent dementia or cognitive impairment [8].
Hypertension is associated with anatomical and physiological changes which harm the brain. AHT increases by atherosclerosis and stiffness in blood vessels. Atherosclerosis is the thickening of arteries produced by the accumulation of fat, cholesterol and other substances, thereby, decreasing the blood vessels’ internal diameter. Additionally, it favors clot formation or thrombogenesis. Such stiffness is triggered by the blood vessels endothelium’s hypertrophy, increasing collagen and fibronectin deposition. All the above explains why hypertension is one of the main factors associated to stroke and dementia [9,10]. Blood vessels’ rigidity is a predictor of vascular events [11] and it generates mini strokes in basal ganglia and white matter arterioles, therefore, causing the so-called small vessel disease [12,13]. In addition, AHT is a risk factor for atrial fibrillation, a condition that increases the probability of developing cognitive impairment [14].
Hypertension also causes a reduced blood flow to the brain or hypoperfusion, due to a problem with self-regulation and microvascular rarefaction. Self-regulation is the blood vessel capacity of keeping a relatively constant blood flow through the brain, despite blood pressure levels in the rest of the body [15]. Constant high blood pressure affects self-regulation, causing the brain to decrease its blood flow, and thus protecting it from high blood pressure damage but increasing risk of ischemic injury. Besides, loss of micro vessels causes microvascular rarefaction, a change in the arterial and venous system which also reduces blood flow and potential blood compensation in vascular insufficiency or exclusionary conditions [9,10].
Likewise, the blood brain barrier is affected by high blood pressure, since plasmatic protein extravasation conducts to vascular, perivascular inflammation and microvascular thrombosis. All this contributes to white matter damage through inflammatory mediators, both oxygen and nitrogen reactive [12,16].
Hemorrhagic heart attack, ischemia and small vessel disease are all associated with vascular dementia [17]. Furthermore, an association between systolic pressure (>160 mmHg) and Alzheimer’s disease has been found (hazard ratio 1.25, IC95% 1.06, 1.47) [18], possibly because vascular damage increases amyloid plaque formation and neurofibrillary tangles [12]. Similarly, the hypoperfusion caused by constant high blood pressure activates different Alzheimer associated mechanisms and cognitive impairment [19].
The decrease of blood pressure in patients with hypertension reduces the risk of having dementia or mild cognitive impairment. Nonetheless, such an effect over cognitive functioning is controversial [20], particularly after the age of 60 years old [21].
Cognitive aging is heterogeneous: while knowledge-related processes increase, new-information processes decrease [22,23]. The most affected processes are attention-related, mainly processing speed, work memory and cognitive inhibition, whereas episodic memory and reasoning are the less affected ones [24,25,26]. Similarly, it has been discovered that hypertension primarily affects processing speed, memory and flexibility [27,28], similar processes which occur during aging.
In two previous systematic revisions, an association among blood pressure and cognitive functions has been found. For example, an increase in high blood pressure is related with lower cognitive performance. In addition, higher and lower levels of blood pressure relate with cognitive performance, with an U-shaped relationship. Meanwhile, some studies show that with higher blood pressure, a better cognitive performance is obtained [27,28].
On the other hand, Forte et al. (2020), carried out a systematic review with the aim of measuring the effects of blood pressure on cognitive performance in adults and older adults. In this sense, they analyzed fifty studies and found that higher blood pressure is associated with a higher risk of cognitive decline in the young adult population. In contrast, higher blood pressure was reported as a protective factor for cognitive performance in older people, which they called the “cardiovascular paradox” [29].
The differences found in the studies might have been the result of the preferred design method in each revision. For instance, Van den Berg et al. (2009), included 24 studies, but only 11 of these had a group control [27]. Other elements that varied in the selected studies were the cut-off points for systolic and diastolic blood pressure to establish the diagnosis of AHT. In this sense, some studies considered it as 140/90 mmHg, while others were 160/95 mmHg [27,28]. The test used to evaluate cognitive functions included a screening test [28].
Due to the above, we performed a systematic revision to determine the relationship between high blood pressure and cognitive performance in older people.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Strategies

The reported items for the systematic revisions and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA) were used to perform this revision (for a detailed summary see Appendix A). The protocol has not been registered. We researched published articles from January 1990 to March 2020 through Pubmed, Scopus and PsycINFO data bases with the search key words: “hypertension” OR “blood pressure” AND “cognition” AND “older”.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

For the studies to be included, they needed to fulfill the predefined requirements of PEO: Population, Exposition and Outcome. For this systematic revision we included the studies with the following designs: cross-sectional study, cohort study, case-control study; with a population between 50 and 80 years old; with one or more groups with hypertension and with a group or population without hypertension to assess the effect of AHT. Furthermore, the studies had to use at least two valid neuropsychological instruments to measure cognitive functions. We excluded systematic revision articles, case studies and basic research studies with animals. We also excluded studies with a population with a neurological or psychiatric disease (cerebrovascular event, dementia, cognitive impairment, depression, etc.) or some other disease affecting cognition in a significant manner like cancer, AIDS and renal insufficiency. Finally, we also excluded articles which only used a screening test to evaluate cognitive functions, for example, the Folstein Mental State mini test or the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

2.3. Article Selection

An independent article revision was performed by the authors (JM S-N and UD R-S) at every stage, considering inclusion/exclusion criteria. We used Excel software to keep track of the revision process. When disagreement occurred among both authors, a third author (VM M-N) was involved to participate in the discussion. First, we eliminated repeated articles. Next was the selection of articles based on the title and abstract. Subsequently, the full articles were reviewed, and the articles were selected for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis.

2.4. Analysis and Data Synthesis

The authors independently registered study type, sample characteristics (size, male/female ratio, age, scholarship and blood pressure, their hypertension definition and main results). Subsequently, we compared the compiled data and, in case of disagreement, the article was reviewed again.
The author JM S-N classified the tests and implemented tasks in each study, using the following categories: executive functions, work memory, processing speed, cognitive inhibition, short-term memory learning, delayed memory, and reasoning. We selected these processes because they are the ones most affected during aging [22,24].
The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality case-control studies in the meta-analysis [30]. When the interventions and associated outcomes were assessed as sufficiently homogeneous and when sufficient information was available from the studies, quantitative data were pooled in the Review Manager (Version 5.3, The Cochrane Collaboration 2014) for meta-analysis. In this sense, in the event that the group with hypertension was divided by some characteristic, the scores were calculated to obtain only a mean score, standard deviation and sample size. The meta-analysis of these values was performed using the random effects model. The I2 statistic was used to assess inconsistencies between studies and describe the percentage of variability in effect. Heterogeneity was considered substantial if the I2 statistic was ≥50%. All effect sizes were calculated using standardized mean differences (SME), as all studies used a wide variety of scale measures.

3. Results

3.1. Studies Selection

In the initial search strategy, we found 1169 articles, mainly on PubMed (After removing the duplicated publications), 1033 articles were rejected according in their titles and abstracts. 136 studies were reviewed, and out of these we excluded 37 due to differences regarding their methodology. Additionally, we excluded another 67 because those only used one screening instrument, and six were disqualified for other reasons. Upon completion, we ended up with 26 articles which met the eligibility criteria, of which 8 were included in the meta-analysis (Figure 1).

3.2. Studies Characteristics

We selected 26 studies, of which six were cross-sectional, nine were cohort and 11 were case-control (Table 1). The sample size of patients with hypertension ranged from 12 [31] to approximately 3200 [32]. The age of the participants was mostly around 70 years (Table 1). The percentage of men varied from 7% [33] to 69.4% [34]. Some studies perform a division by gender [35,36], and in five we did not find information on the composition by gender [37,38,39,40,41]. Most of the studies included participants with eight or more years of education (Table 1), in only two studies did most of the participants have less than eight years of education [42,43].
The definition of hypertension was by medical diagnosis or by being prescribed medications for high blood pressure (Table 1). In three of them we did not find the criteria to define arterial hypertension [41,44,45]. The cut-off points of systolic pressure to define hypertension varied in the studies, one of them was greater than 130 mmHg 3200 [46], five were greater than 140 mmHg [35,36,38,39,42], and seven studies were greater than 160 mmHg [32,40,43,47,48,49,50].
Eleven case-control studies were found without risk of bias and with adequate quality to perform a quantitative analysis (Appendix B). In some studies, they divided the sample with hypertension into two groups: controlled blood pressure (systolic pressure < 140 mmHg) or out of control [38,51], or into three groups: controlled blood pressure, out of control, and without treatment [39,42]

3.3. Relationship of Cognitive Performance with Arterial Hypertension

In most studies it is found that the higher the blood pressure or hypertension, the lower the cognitive performance. Only in one study was it found that higher the diastolic pressure contributed to a better cognitive performance [47]. In three studies it was found that a low or high blood pressure is related to a lower cognitive performance [32,45,51] and in two studies no relationship was found between hypertension and cognitive performance [52,53] (Table 1).

3.3.1. Processing Speed

The processing speed was tested in 17 studies (Table 2). Seven studies found that higher blood pressure is associated with lower performance on processing speed tests [31,36,37,38,41,48,54]. Two studies found a relationship between lower performance in cognitive tests with lower diastolic pressure in people who do not receive treatment [51], and systolic in participants who suffered myocardial infarction [32].
Four studies with a total of 759 participants with hypertension and 771 controls were included in the processing speed meta-analysis (Figure 2). The results were analyzed from the digit and symbol substitution tests [37,46], trail making test A [31] and a measure composed of several tests [48]. In this indicator, a higher score indicates a lower cognitive performance. Two studies had subdivisions of the group with hypertension: one with several treatments [37], and another in untreated, uncontrolled and controlled [31], for which they were united, forming three groups; controlled hypertensive, uncontrolled hypertensive, and the control group.
The group with uncontrolled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance in processing speed SMD = 0.40 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.54; I2 = 28%; p = 0.24; n = 4 studies; hypertension, n = 747; control, n = 714). The group with controlled hypertension compared to the control group had a higher performance in processing speed SMD = −0.61 (95% CI: −1.24, 0.03; p = 0.06; n = 1 study; hypertension, n=12; control, n = 57).

3.3.2. Working Memory

The working memory was evaluated in 13 studies, mainly with the Trail Making Test B and Digit Span Backwards (Table 2). Six studies found that higher blood pressure is associated with lower performance on working memory tests [31,36,37,38,40,48,51]. One study found that low diastolic pressure is associated with lower performance on working memory tests, particularly in the low-educated population [51].
Three studies with a total of 481 participants with hypertension and 499 without hypertension were included in the meta-analysis of working memory (Figure 3). The results used were from the Trail Making Test B [31,37,52]. In this indicator, a higher score indicates a lower performance. The studies divided the groups into ingesting different drugs [37] and untreated, uncontrolled and controlled [31], for which they were united forming three groups: uncontrolled hypertension, controlled hypertension, and the control group.
The group with uncontrolled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance in working memory SMD = 0.28 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.41; I2 = 0%; p = 0.65; n = 3 studies; n hypertension = 469; n control = 499). The group with controlled hypertension compared to the control group had a better performance SMD = −0.39 (95% CI: −1.02, 0.23; p = 0.1 n = 1 studies; n hypertension = 12; n control = 57), but it is not statistically significant.

3.3.3. Short-Term Memory and Learning

Short-term memory and learning were included in 23 studies. In most cases, short-term memory was measured with a word-learning task; however, the tests were different among the studies, because the number of words ranged from 10 to 20 (Table 2). There were differences in 11 studies [31,35,38,41,42,43,44,47,48,51,55]. On the other hand, 10 showed no differences [33,34,36,37,39,48,49,52,53,56]. Only one case showed a difference in visual memory [36]; meanwhile one study found a U-shaped relationship [32].
Six studies with a total of 798 participants with hypertension and 819 without hypertension were included in the meta-analysis of short-term memory and learning (Figure 4). The results used were the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) [52], the Selective Reminding Test (SRT) [55], the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD) [39], the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) [37], and the Logical Memory test [31,36]. Several studies had subdivisions in the hypertension group: with and without subjective memory problems [55], ingesting different medications [37], in men and women [36], untreated, uncontrolled and controlled [31,39]; reason why they were united forming three groups; controlled hypertensive, uncontrolled hypertensive and control group.
The group with uncontrolled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance in short-term memory and learning SMD = −0.27 (95% CI: −0.37, −0.17; I2 = 0%; p = 0.89; n = 6 studies; n hypertension = 752; n control = 819). The group with controlled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance SMD = −0.05 (95% CI: −0.36, 0.26; I2 = 0%; p = 0.81; n = 2 studies; n hypertension = 46; n control = 260).

3.3.4. Delayed Memory

Delayed memory was included in 15 studies, and the time variation was from 2 to 30 min (Table 2). In two, higher pressure was found to be related to lower performance in delayed memory [31,32]. In one study it was found that lower diastolic pressure is related to lower performance in delayed memory, particularly in people who have suffered a stroke [32]. A study found that higher pressure is related to better performance in delayed memory in men [47].
Five studies with a total of 355 participants with hypertension and 439 without hypertension were included in the delayed memory meta-analysis (Figure 5). The indicators used were CVLT delayed memory [52], SRT [55] CERAD [39], WISC, and logical memory [31,36]. Several studies had subdivisions in participants with hypertension: with and without subjective memory problems [55], in men and women [36], untreated, uncontrolled and controlled [31,39], for which they were united forming three groups: controlled hypertensive, uncontrolled hypertensive and control group.
The group with uncontrolled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance in memory delayed SMD = −0.20 (95% CI: −0.35, −0.05; I2 = 0%; p = 84; n = 5 studies; n hypertension = 309; n control = 439). The group with controlled hypertension compared to the control group had a lower performance SMD = −0.05 (95% CI: −0.36, 0.26; I2 = 0%; p = 0.81; n = 2 studies; n hypertension = 46; n control = 260).

3.3.5. Other Cognitive Processes

Executive functions were assessed in 12 of the 26 studies (Table 2). In seven studies, higher blood pressure was found to be related to lower cognitive performance [34,35,42,48,51,52,56]. In one study, low and high diastolic pressure were found to be related to lower performance in executive functions [46].
Cognitive inhibition is only assessed in two studies using the Stroop interference task (Table 2). No significant difference was found between hypertensive and normotensive participants [31,52].
Reasoning was evaluated in seven studies (Table 2). In four studies, it was found that higher blood pressure is related to lower performance in reasoning tests [50,52,54,55].

4. Discussion

The present review was carried out with the objective of determining the relationship between high blood pressure and cognitive performance in older adults. The tests used were grouped into cognitive processes that decline during aging [22,24]. It was found through a quantitative analysis that higher blood pressure affects processing speed, working memory, short-term memory, and delayed memory.
The observed results in a qualitative analysis suggest that elderly people with hypertension have a lower level of performance than old people without this condition. This applied to executive function (seven out of 12 studies), work memory (six out of 13 studies), processing speed (seven out of 17 studies), short-term memory (nine out of 23 studies) or delayed memory (two out of 15 studies) and reasoning (four out of 7 studies). Nonetheless, in cognitive inhibition there is a need to perform more studies to be able to suggest or rule out an effect.
Our results contrast with another systematic revision made by Van den Berg, et al. (2009) [27], who concluded that the most affected process in hypertension patients is memory. In their revision, they performed a quantitative analysis where two articles included mild cognitive impairment patients [57,58], a condition which mainly affects memory [59].
In this sense, our revision has two main differences with the one made by Van de Berg et al. (2009) [27]. We excluded studies which integrated patients with mild cognitive impairment and we divided memory in two categories: short-term and delayed memory. The first one is related with processes like attention, while delayed memory is related to storage, which is an indicator of the hippocampus’s integrity [60]. This division was relevant, because it allowed us to show that in most studies there is a difference among AHT patients and people without this disease.
Most of the studies found reported that AHT is related to lower cognitive performance; however, in two studies a paradoxical effect is found. One study reported that higher diastolic pressure in men is related to higher cognitive performance [47], the other that the group with controlled AHT had higher performance compared to the control group [31], which was corroborated in the meta-analysis carried out in our study. One explanation for the paradoxical effect may be due to increased perfusion in the brain, which benefits from thickening of the arteries [61]. Another possible explanation may be an effect of the medications. In a systematic review, it was found that angiotensin II receptor blockers can prevent cognitive deterioration in people with AHT [62], and that these could have a positive effect on cognition. However, to corroborate the above it is necessary to carry out more research in this regard.
In four studies it was found that people with lower diastolic blood pressure had a lower performance, mainly in working memory and processing speed [32,45,51], particularly in people with less education [51]. Also, a lower working memory performance was found in people with low systolic pressure, especially if they had a myocardial infarction [32].
This is consistent with studies that report that both high and low blood flow can cause damage to the brain. On the one hand, hypertension can cause cerebrovascular accidents and lesions in the white matter [63]. On the other hand, low blood pressure may be associated with ischemic injuries [64,65]. Furthermore, very low blood pressure has been associated with the presence of Alzheimer’s disease 60. Considering the above, it would be necessary to maintain homeostatic blood pressure to preserve cognitive functioning.
A limit point is used to diagnose AHT, which causes significant variation. The value most frequently used is a blood pressure higher than 140/90 mmHg [66]. Another higher value set is 160/95 mmHG [67] or lower at 130/80 mmHg [2]. The latter can also explain the AHT effect on cognitive functions and inconsistencies in the different studies. For example, in this present study we did not find a significant difference among people with AHT and patients without this condition. Regarding work memory and processing speed, in one article authors used systolic pressure > 160 mmHg as diagnostic criteria [42]. Consequently, people with lower blood pressure might have already been affected, which would nullify the differences. On the other hand, in a different study, AHT was diagnosed with a blood pressure of 130 mmHg [46]. Thus, there could be people with these blood pressure levels who are not experiencing any impact on their cognitive functions.
Another relevant criterion is the previous diagnosis. For instance, people with AHT who maintain a controlled blood pressure by taking medication like angiotensin II receptor blockers can experience a lower impact on cognitive functions [62]. However, it is necessary to include the blood pressure criteria because if only the previous diagnosis is considered, people with a systolic pressure > 140 mmHg could be included in the control group [57]. That being the case, it would be better to divide AHT patients in at least three groups: controlled, uncontrolled with treatment and uncontrolled without treatment, besides the control group. [68,69]
We found that systolic pressure is related with a lower cognitive performance. In this sense, similar findings have been pointed out and reported in reviews narrative and systematic [64,65]. Another relevant indicator could be the pulse pressure, which is the difference between systolic and diastolic pressure, as whichever is higher might negatively affect cognitive functions [38,42,52].
The instruments used to measure cognitive functions are quite relevant to measure the effect of AHT as well. The most used ones in which there was a significant difference were the Trail Making Test A and B [36,37,38] and the digit-symbol substitution test [37,46,52]. Meanwhile, other instruments showed no difference, the work memory digits task being one example [31,36,39].
The National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and the Canadian Stroke Network have proposed three different evaluation protocols with AHT patients; the differences lie within the time (60 min, 30 min and 5 min) in which the tests mentioned above are included [70]. It is likely that these tests are sensitive enough to detect changes caused by AHT without structural damage; however, more research needs to be done to verify this.
One of the most relevant characteristics in the sample is the education level. In our revision, only two studies had a population with less than eight years of education [42,43]. Education is the main factor associated with cognitive reserve; this term is defined as a person’s capacity that if brain damage occurs, they can live with an adequate cognitive performance [71]. Therefore, the effects caused by an alteration in blood pressure may be greater; [51] however, more research is needed on this.
Our revision presents certain limitations: we failed to include studies with people older than 80 years old, and we did not revise grey literature nor the previously registered protocols. It would be advisable to carry out more studies analyzing other variables such as age, sex, follow-up time and academic level, comorbidities (atrial fibrillation and other arrhythmias, diabetes mellitus), medications and lifestyle (exercise, nutrition, sleep, smoking, and alcohol intake).

5. Conclusions

Our findings suggest that older people with AHT present a lower performance than old people without this condition, mainly in terms of processing speed, work memory, and memory. However, more studies with AHT patients need to be done, in both controlled and uncontrolled treatments. Furthermore, instruments sensitive to cognitive functions caused by AHT changes are essential in these kinds of studies, as is the capacity to identify the right AHT limit point (systolic or heart rate) where a change in cognitive functions is presented.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.M.S.-N. and V.M.M.-N.; methodology, J.M.S.-N. and U.D.R.-S.; formal analysis, J.M.S.-N. and V.M.M.-N.; investigation, J.M.S.-N. and U.D.R.-S.; writing-original draft preparation, J.M.S.-N. and U.D.R.-S.; review and editing, V.M.M.-N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (DGAPA-UNAM) (PAPIME PE203421); Programa para la Investigación Bibliográfica Científica sobre Salud (PIBCIS) de la FES Zaragoza, UNAM; Red Académica Asesora de Revisiones Sistemáticas (RAARS).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. PRISMA (Systematic Revision Report Elements and Meta-Analysis Protocols) Verification List, 2009

Section/Topic#Checklist ItemReported on Page #
TITLE
Title 1Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 1
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; eligibility study criteria, participants, interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and key findings implications; systematic review registration number. 1
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3Describe the rationale for the review within the context of what is already known. 2
Objectives 4Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). 3
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5Indicate if a reviewed protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address); and, if available, provide registration information including registration number. NA
Eligibility criteria 6Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, follow-up length) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. 3
Information sources 7Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with coverage dates, contact study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched. 3
Search 8Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated. 3
Study selection 9State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, included in the meta-analysis). 3
Data collection process 10Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. 3
Data items 11List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made. 3
Risk of bias in individual studies 12Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. 3
Summary measures 13State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 3
Synthesis of results 14Describe the handling data methods and study combining results; if done, including consistency measures (e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis. 3
Risk of bias across studies 15Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective reporting within studies). NA
Additional analyses 16Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression); if done, indicating which were pre-specified. NA
RESULTS
Study selection 17Give numbers of screened studies, assessed for eligibility, included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. 4
Study characteristics 18For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and provide the citations. 4
Risk of bias within studies 19Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 18
Results of individual studies 20For all outcomes considered (benefits or disadvantages), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. 4–12
Synthesis of results 21Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and consistency measures. 4–12
Risk of bias across studies 22Present any assessment of risk of bias results across studies (see Item 15). 18
Additional analysis 23Give results of additional analyses if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). NA
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). 14
Limitations 25Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias). 14
Conclusions 26Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 14
FUNDING
Funding 27Describe funding sources for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review. 15
From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.

Appendix B. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses

StudySelectionComparabilityExposureTotal Quality Score
In the Case DefinitionRepresentativeness of the CasesSelection of ControlsDefinition of ControlsComparability of Cases and ControlsAscertainment of ExposureSame Method of Ascertainment for Cases and ControlsNon-Respose Rate
Wei et al., 2018 [42]111111107
Yeung et al.,2017 [52]111111118
Nguyen et al., 2017 [55]101111117
Hudak et al., 2013 [37]011101116
Yasar et al., 2011 [38]111111118
Bucur & Madden., 2010 [46]101111117
Brady et al., 2005 [39]111111118
Waldstein, Brown et al., 2005 [31]101111117
Waldstein & Katzel, 2004 [36]101111117
Saxby et al., 2003 [48]111111117
Harrington et al., 2000 [49]111111117

References

  1. Williams, B.; Mancia, G.; Spiering, W.; Agabiti Rosei, E.; Azizi, M.; Burnier, M.; Clement, D.L.; Coca, A.; de Simone, G.; Dominiczak, A.; et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension. Eur. Heart J. 2018, 39, 3021–3104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Whelton, P.K.; Carey, R.M.; Aronow, W.S.; Casey, D.E.; Collins, K.J.; Himmelfarb, C.D.; DePalma, S.M.; Gidding, S.; Jamerson, K.A.; Jones, D.W.; et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension 2018, 71, 1269–1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Gómez, J.F.; Camacho, P.A.; López-López, J.; López-Jaramillo, P. Control y Tratamiento de La Hipertensión Arterial: Programa 20-20. Rev. Colomb. de Cardiol. 2019, 26, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cloutier, L.; Lamarre-Cliche, M. Hypertension in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Blood Pressure Measurement Methods, Targets and Therapy. Can. J. Diabetes 2018, 42, 188–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Radišauskas, R.; Kuzmickiene, I.; Milinavičiene, E.; Everatt, R. Hypertension, Serum Lipids and Cancer Risk: A Review of Epidemiological Evidence. Medicina 2016, 52, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liu, M.-Y.; Li, N.; Li, W.A.; Khan, H. Association between Psychosocial Stress and Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neurol. Res. 2017, 39, 573–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Walker, K.A.; Power, M.C.; Gottesman, R.F. Defining the Relationship Between Hypertension, Cognitive Decline, and Dementia: A Review. Curr. Hypertens. Rep. 2017, 19, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gorelick, P.B.; Erkinjuntti, T.; Hofman, A.; Rocca, W.A.; Skoog, I.; Winblad, B. Prevention of Vascular Dementia. Alzheimer Dis. Assoc. Disord. 1999, 13, S131–S139. [Google Scholar]
  9. Goshgarian, C.; Gorelick, P.B. Perspectives on the Relation of Blood Pressure and Cognition in the Elderly. Trends Cardiovasc. Med. 2019, 29, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Iadecola, C.; Yaffe, K.; Biller, J.; Bratzke, L.C.; Faraci, F.M.; Gorelick, P.B.; Gulati, M.; Kamel, H.; Knopman, D.S.; Launer, L.J.; et al. Impact of Hypertension on Cognitive Function: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension 2016, 68, e67–e94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Izzo, J.L.; Shykoff, B.E. Arterial Stiffness: Clinical Relevance, Measurement, and Treatment. Rev. Cardiovasc. Med. 2001, 2, 29–34. [Google Scholar]
  12. Iadecola, C. The Pathobiology of Vascular Dementia. Neuron 2013, 80, 844–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Yang, E.Y.; Chambless, L.; Sharrett, A.R.; Virani, S.S.; Liu, X.; Tang, Z.; Boerwinkle, E.; Ballantyne, C.M.; Nambi, V. Carotid Arterial Wall Characteristics Are Associated With Incident Ischemic Stroke But Not Coronary Heart Disease in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Stroke 2012, 43, 103–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Madhavan, M.; Graff-Radford, J.; Piccini, J.P.; Gersh, B.J. Cognitive Dysfunction in Atrial Fibrillation. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2018, 15, 744–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gonzalez-Marrero, I.; Hernández-Abad, L.G.; Castañeyra-Ruiz, L.; Carmona-Calero, E.M.; Castañeyra-Perdomo, A. Variaciones de Los Plexos Coroideos y Las Barreras Cerebrales En La Hipertensión Arterial y El Envejecimiento. Neurología 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Setiadi, A.; Korim, W.S.; Elsaafien, K.; Yao, S.T. The Role of the Blood–Brain Barrier in Hypertension. Exp. Physiol. 2018, 103, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Rensma, S.P.; van Sloten, T.T.; Launer, L.J.; Stehouwer, C.D.A. Cerebral Small Vessel Disease and Risk of Incident Stroke, Dementia and Depression, and All-Cause Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2018, 90, 164–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Lennon, M.J.; Makkar, S.R.; Crawford, J.D.; Sachdev, P.S. Midlife Hypertension and Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2019, 71, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Park, J.-H.; Hong, J.-H.; Lee, S.-W.; Ji, H.D.; Jung, J.-A.; Yoon, K.-W.; Lee, J.-I.; Won, K.S.; Song, B.-I.; Kim, H.W. The Effect of Chronic Cerebral Hypoperfusion on the Pathology of Alzheimer’s Disease: A Positron Emission Tomography Study in Rats. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 14102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Buford, T.W. Hypertension and Aging. Ageing Res. Rev. 2016, 26, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Sierra, C. Hypertension and the Risk of Dementia. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2020, 7, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Craik, F.I.M.; Bialystok, E. Cognition through the Lifespan: Mechanisms of Change. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2006, 10, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Salthouse, T.A. Major Issues in Cognitive Aging; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  24. Salthouse, T.A. Localizing Age-Related Individual Differences in a Hierarchical Structure. Intelligence 2004, 32, 541–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Salthouse, T.A. Relations between Cognitive Abilities and Measures of Executive Functioning. Neuropsychology 2005, 19, 532–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tucker-Drob, E.; Johnson, K.; Jones, R. The Cognitive Reserve Hypothesis: A Longitudinal Examination of Age- Associated Declines in Reasoning and Processing Speed. Dev. Psychol. 2011, 45, 431–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. van den Berg, E.; Kloppenborg, R.P.; Kessels, R.P.; Jaap Kappelle, L.; Jan Biessels, G. Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Dyslipidemia and Obesity: A Systematic Comparison of Their Impact on Cognition. Biochim. Biophys. Acta-Mol. Basis Dis. 2009, 1792, 470–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Birns, J.; Kalra, L. Cognitive Function and Hypertension. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2009, 23, 86–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Forte, G.; de Pascalis, V.; Favieri, F.; Casagrande, M. Effects of Blood Pressure on Cognitive Performance: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 9, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  30. Wells, G.A.; Shea, B.; O´Connell, D.; Peterson, J.; Welch, V.; Losos, M.; Tugwell, P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality If Nonrandomized Studies in Meta-Analyses. Available online: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp (accessed on 14 October 2021).
  31. Waldstein, S.R.; Brown, J.R.P.; Maier, K.J.; Katzel, L.I. Diagnosis of Hypertension and High. Blood Pressure Levels Negatively Affect. Cognitive Function in Older Adults. Ann. Behav. Med. 2005, 29, 174–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Morris, M.C.; Scherr, P.A.; Hebert, L.E.; Bennett, D.A.; Wilson, D.-F.R.S.; Glynn, R.J.; Evans, D.A. Association between Blood Pressure and Cognitive Function in a Biracial Community Population of Older Persons. Neuroepidemiology 2002, 21, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Izquierdo-Porrera, A.M.; Waldstein, S.R. Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Cognitive Function in African Americans. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2002, 57, P377–P380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Fischer, A.L.; O’Rourke, N.; Loken Thornton, W. Age Differences in Cognitive and Affective Theory of Mind: Concurrent Contributions of Neurocognitive Performance, Sex, and Pulse Pressure. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2017, 72, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Singh-Manoux, A.; Marmot, M. High Blood Pressure Was Associated with Cognitive Function in Middle-Age in the Whitehall II Study. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2005, 58, 1308–1315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Waldstein, S.R.; Katzel, L.I. Gender Differences in the Relation of Hypertension to Cognitive Function in Older Adults. Neurol. Res. 2004, 26, 502–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hudak, E.M.; Edwards, J.D.; Athilingam, P.; McEvoy, C.L. A Comparison of Cognitive and Everyday Functional Performance Among Older Adults With and Without Hypertension. Clin. Gerontol. 2013, 36, 113–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Yasar, S.; Ko, J.Y.; Nothelle, S.; Mielke, M.M.; Carlson, M.C. Evaluation of the Effect of Systolic Blood Pressure and Pulse Pressure on Cognitive Function: The Women’s Health and Aging Study II. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e27976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Brady, C.B.; Spiro, A.; Gaziano, J.M. Effects of Age and Hypertension Status on Cognition: The Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study. Neuropsychology 2005, 19, 770–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kritz-Silverstein, D.; Laughlin, G.A.; McEvoy, L.K.; Barrett-Connor, E. Sex and Age Differences in the Association of Blood Pressure and Hypertension with Cognitive Function in the Elderly: The Rancho Bernardo Study. J. Prev. Alzheimers Dis. 2017, 4, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Whitfield, K.E.; Allaire, J.C.; Gamaldo, A.; Aiken-Morgan, A.T.; Sims, R.; Edwards, C. Blood Pressure and Memory in Older African Americans. Ethn. Dis. 2008, 18, 181–186. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wei, J.; Yin, X.; Liu, Q.; Tan, L.; Jia, C. Association between Hypertension and Cognitive Function: A Cross-Sectional Study in People over 45 Years Old in China. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2018, 20, 1575–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Dregan, A.; Stewart, R.; Gulliford, M.C. Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Cognitive Decline in Adults Aged 50 and over: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Age Ageing 2013, 42, 338–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Okusaga, O.; Stewart, M.C.W.; Butcher, I.; Deary, I.; Fowkes, F.G.R.; Price, J.F. Smoking, Hypercholesterolaemia and Hypertension as Risk Factors for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults. Age Ageing 2013, 42, 306–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Hebert, L.E.; Scherr, P.A.; Bennett, D.A.; Bienias, J.L.; Wilson, R.S.; Morris, M.C.; Evans, D.A. Blood Pressure and Late-Life Cognitive Function Change. Neurology 2004, 62, 2021–2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bucur, B.; Madden, D.J. Effects of Adult Age and Blood Pressure on Executive Function and Speed of Processing. Exp. Aging Res. 2010, 36, 153–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Cherbuin, N.; Mortby, M.E.; Janke, A.L.; Sachdev, P.S.; Abhayaratna, W.P.; Anstey, K.J. Blood Pressure, Brain Structure, and Cognition: Opposite Associations in Men and Women. Am. J. Hypertens. 2015, 28, 225–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Saxby, B.K.; Harrington, F.; McKeith, I.G.; Wesnes, K.; Ford, G.A. Effects of Hypertension on Attention, Memory, and Executive Function in Older Adults. Health Psychol. 2003, 22, 587–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Harrington, F.; Saxby, B.K.; Mckeith, I.G.; Wesnes, K.; Ford, G.A. Cognitive Performance in Hypertensive and Normotensive Older Subjects Methods. Hypertension 2000, 36, 1079–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Elias, P.K.; Elias, M.F.; Robbins, M.A.; Budge, M.M. Blood Pressure-Related Cognitive Decline. Hypertension 2004, 44, 631–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Waldstein, S.R.; Giggey, P.P.; Thayer, J.F.; Zonderman, A.B. Nonlinear Relations of Blood Pressure to Cognitive Function: The Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. Hypertension 2005, 45, 374–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Yeung, S.E.; Thornton, W.L. Do It-Yourself: Home Blood Pressure as a Predictor of Traditional and Everyday Cognition in Older Adults. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0177424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Stewart, R.; Prince, M.; Mann, A. Age, Vascular Risk, and Cognitive Decline in an Older, British, African-Caribbean Population. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2003, 51, 1547–1553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Robbins, M.A.; Elias, M.F.; Elias, P.K.; Budge, M.M. Blood Pressure and Cognitive Function in an African-American and a Caucasian-American Sample: The Maine-Syracuse Study. Psychosom. Med. 2005, 67, 707–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Nguyen, L.A.; Haws, K.A.; Fitzhugh, M.C.; Torre, G.A.; Hishaw, G.A.; Alexander, G.E. Interactive Effects of Subjective Memory Complaints and Hypertension on Learning and Memory Performance in the Elderly. Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 2016, 23, 154–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Nation, D.A.; Wierenga, C.E.; Delano-wood, L.; Jak, A.J.; Delis, D.C.; Salmon, D.P.; Bondi, M.W. Elevated Pulse Pressure Is Associated with Age-Related Decline in Language Ability. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 2010, 16, 933–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Waldstein, S.R.; Ryan, C.M.; Manuck, S.B.; Parkinson, D.K.; Bromet, E.J. Learning and Memory Function in Men With Untreated Blood Pressure Elevation. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1991, 59, 513–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Schmidt, R.; Fazekas, F.; Offenbacher, H.; Lytwyn, H.; Blematl, B.; Niederkorn, K.; Horner, S.; Payer, F.; Freidl, W. Magnetic Resonance Imaging White Matter Lesions and Cognitive Impairment in Hypertensive Individuals. Arch. Neurol. 1991, 48, 417–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Petersen, R.C.; Caracciolo, B.; Brayne, C.; Gauthier, S.; Jelic, V.; Fratiglioni, L. Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Concept in Evolution. J. Intern. Med. 2014, 275, 214–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Squire, L.R.; Bayley, P.J. The Neuroscience of Remote Memory. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2007, 17, 185–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Regenhardt, R.W.; Das, A.S.; Lo, E.H.; Caplan, L.R. Advances in Understanding the Pathophysiology of Lacunar Stroke: A Review. JAMA Neurol. 2018, 75, 1273–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Stuhec, M.; Keuschler, J.; Serra-Mestres, J.; Isetta, M. Effects of Different Antihypertensive Medication Groups on Cognitive Function in Older Patients: A Systematic Review. Eur. Psychiatry 2017, 46, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Alloubani, A.; Saleh, A.; Abdelhafiz, I. Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus as a Predictive Risk Factors for Stroke. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Clin. Res. Rev. 2018, 12, 577–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Shi, Y.; Thrippleton, M.J.; Makin, S.D.; Marshall, I.; Geerlings, M.I.; de Craen, A.J.; van Buchem, M.A.; Wardlaw, J.M. Cerebral Blood Flow in Small Vessel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Cereb. blood flow Metab. 2016, 36, 1653–1667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Kisler, K.; Nelson, A.R.; Montagne, A.; Zlokovic, B.v. Cerebral Blood Flow Regulation and Neurovascular Dysfunction in Alzheimer Disease. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2017, 18, 419–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Chobanian, A.v.; Alderman, M.H.; DeQuattro, V.; Frohlich, E.D.; Gifford, R.W.; Hill, M.N.; Kaplan, N.M.; Langford, H.G.; Moore, M.A.; Nickey, W.A.; et al. The 1988 Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch. Intern. Med. 1988, 148, 1023–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Staessen, J.; Bulpitt, C.; Clement, D.; de Leeuw, P.; Fagard, R.; Fletcher, A.; Forette, F.; Leonetti, G.; Nissinen, A.; O’Malley, K. Relation between Mortality and Treated Blood Pressure in Elderly Patients with Hypertension: Report of the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly. Br. Med. J. 1989, 298, 1552–1556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Niermeyer, M.A. Cognitive and Gait Decrements among Non-Demented Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes or Hypertension: A Systematic Review. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2018, 32, 1256–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Gifford, K.A.; Badaracco, M.; Liu, D.; Tripodis, Y.; Gentile, A.; Lu, Z.; Palmisano, J.; Jefferson, A.L. Blood Pressure and Cognition Among Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2013, 28, 649–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Hachinski, V.; Iadecola, C.; Petersen, R.C.; Breteler, M.M.; Nyenhuis, D.L.; Black, S.E.; Powers, W.J.; DeCarli, C.; Merino, J.G.; Kalaria, R.N.; et al. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-Canadian Stroke Network Vascular Cognitive Impairment Harmonization Standards. Stroke 2006, 37, 2220–2241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Stern, Y. Cognitive Reserve. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47, 2015–2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Brainsci 11 01445 g001 550
Figure 1. Study selection flow chart.
Figure 1. Study selection flow chart.
Brainsci 11 01445 g001
Brainsci 11 01445 g002 550
Figure 2. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in processing speed. High score indicates lower performance.
Figure 2. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in processing speed. High score indicates lower performance.
Brainsci 11 01445 g002
Brainsci 11 01445 g003 550
Figure 3. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in working memory. High score indicates lower performance.
Figure 3. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in working memory. High score indicates lower performance.
Brainsci 11 01445 g003
Brainsci 11 01445 g004 550
Figure 4. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in short-term memory y learning.
Figure 4. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in short-term memory y learning.
Brainsci 11 01445 g004
Brainsci 11 01445 g005 550
Figure 5. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in delayed recall.
Figure 5. Meta-analysis on the comparison of groups with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension between the control group in delayed recall.
Brainsci 11 01445 g005
Table
Table 1. Description of studies on blood pressure and cognitive functions in older adults.
Table 1. Description of studies on blood pressure and cognitive functions in older adults.
StudyDesign (Years)GoupNAge M
(SD)		Sex (% Men)Edu M
(SD)		SBP M
(SD)		DBP M
(SD)		AHT DefinitionLinks Cognitive Impairment
Kritz-Silverstein et al., 2017 [40]C-sMan
Hipertensive = 62.6%		69373.8 (9.9) Some college o more 77%135 (20)77.5 (9)A
SBP ≥ 160
DBP ≥ 90		Positive HTA
Woman
Hipertensive = 63.4		102273.2 (9.3) Some college o more 62%136 (21)75 (9)
Fischer et al. 2016 [34]C-sHipertensive = 37.6%8571.4 (5.5)69.414.3 (2.3)130 (15)74 (9)APositive PP
Cherbuin et al., 2015 [47]C (8)Hipertensive = 51%26670.4 (1.4)5414.2 (2.6)150 (19)81 (10)DM
SBP ≥ 160
DBP ≥ 90		Women Positive SBD/
Men Negative
DBP
Okusaga et al., 2013 [44]C (5)-231261.7 (6.5)26.9-147 (21)84 (11)-Positive SBP
Dregan et al. 2013 [43]C (8)Hipertensive = 15%593666.9 (10.1)4546% > 8136 (19)75 (11)Normal < 140/90 Border 140–160/90–99
High 160/100		Positive SBP & DBP
Nation et al., 2010 [56]C-sHipertensive = 52%10974.2 (10)4416.2 (2.3)126 (13)73 (9)DMPositive PP
Whitfield et al., 2008 [41]C-s-36161.5 (9.4)-12 (3.9)141 (22)82 (12)-Positive SBP
Singh-Manoux, et al., 2005 [35]C (12)Man415843.9 (6.0) 70% > 8Low = 45%
Medium = 40%
Hihg = 15%		 Low < 120/80 Medium
120–139/80–89
Hihg > 139/90		Positive SBP & DBP
Woman168044.4 (6.0) 48% > 8Low = 50% Medium = 34%
High = 16%
Robbins et al., 2005 [54]C (23)African
HTA = 42%		14754.7 (15.1)61.212.6 (2.5)139 (30)84 (20)DMPositive
SBP
Caucasico
Hipertensive = 36%		141656.6 (17.1)56.214.4 (2.6)138 (27)81 (17.8)
Waldstein, Giggey et al., 2005 [51] C (11)Hipertensive = 33.4%84770.6 (8.5)5916.6 (2.7)139 (20)82 (10.9)APositive
SBP
U curve
DBP
Hebert et al., 2004 [45]C (6)-428474 (6.4)3812 (3.7)140 (20)77 (11.5)-U curve
DBP
Ellias et al. 2004 [50]C (20)<47 years
Hipertensive = 55.8%		28534.9 (7.6)48.414.3 (2.3)130 (18)80 (11.4)SBP ≥ 160
DBP ≥ 90		Positive SBP
≥47 years
Hipertensive = 73.8%		24458.1 (8.4)48.814.2 (2.7)146 (22)83 (12.2)
Steward et al., 2003 [53]C (1.5)Hipertensive = 58%21664 (5.3)4466% > 8138 (28)81 (18.1)ANo association
Izquierdo-Porrera & Waldstein, 2002 [33]C-sHipertensive = 53%4359 (11.2)714 (2.5)136 (21)78 (11)DMPositive DBP
Morris et al., 2002 [32]C-sHipertensive = 55%581665 a 74 (59%)
75–84 (30%)
>85(11%)		3981% > 865–74 = 139
75–84 = 140
>85=138		65–74 = 79
75–84 = 75
>85=73		SBP ≥ 160
DBP ≥ 90		Positive
SBP
U curve
DBP
Wei et al., 2018 [42]C-cControlled
hipertensive		69561(19)32.332% > 6126 (10)74 (8)DMS
BP ≥ 140
DBP ≥ 90		Positive AHT
Treated
high BP hipertensive		97063 (9)31.126.4% > 6156 (19)88 (14)
Untreated hipertensive34361 (9)41.730% > 6 años155 (19)89 (13)
Normotensive472458 (9)34.332% > 6118 (12)71 (9)
Yeung et al.,2017 [52]C-cHipertensive7170.3 (6.5)5114.2 (2.5)126 (10)73 (8)DMNo association
Normotensive6270.2 (6.4)4915 (2.7)119 (13)71 (8)
Nguyen et al., 2017 [55] C-cHipertensive4479 (5)4617 (3.1)149 (16)83 (11)DMPositive AHT
Normotensive6178.1 (5)5315.9 (2.7)143 (17)78 (8)
Hudak et al., 2013 [37]C-cHipertensive39073.3 (5.9)-13.9 (2.7)--DMPositive AHT
Normotensive38073.3 (5.9)-13.9 (2.7)--
Yasar et al., 2011 [38]C-c (9)Hipertensive
SBP ≥ 160		19074.1 (2.7)-93.6% ≥ 12178 (12)88 (17)SBP > 140Positive AHT
Hipertensive SBP 140–15911373.7 (2.8)-91% ≥ 12149 (5)73 (12)
Normotensive10372.2 (2.9)-92.2% ≥ 12129 (9)67 (10)
Bucur & Madden., 2010 [46]C-cHipertensive2168 (4.7)5716.6 (4.7)139 (7)79 (9)SBP ≥ 130
DBP ≥ 85		Positive AHT
Normotensive2267.8 (5.1)3816.8 (2.3)118 (8)72 (5)
Brady et al., 2005 [39]C-c(2)Controlled hipertensive3468.6 (6)-14.7 (2.4)127 (9)78 (8)SBP ≥ 140
DBP ≥ 90		Positive AHT
Treatable
high BP hipertensives		4569.5 (6.1)-14.5 (3.1)153 (14)89 (9)
Untreatable hipertensive7568.4 (7.5)-13.8 (2.6)157 (16)89 (11)
Normotensive20366 (7)-14.4 (2.6)124 (9)78 (6)
Waldstein, Brown et al., 2005 [31]C-cControlled hypertensive1268.4 (9.8)6916.8 (3.8)133 (5)76 (8)DMPositive AHT
High BP Hypertensive1767.6 (5)6215.5 (3.2)159 (9)85 (6)
Normotensive5765.8 (6.5)6116.9 (2.7)120 (11)70 (7)
High BP No hypertensive1567 (6)6515.3 (2.7)145 (8)81 (5)
Waldstein & Katzel, 2004 [36]C-cHypertensive Man3168.9 (6.6) 16.5 (3.4)147 (14)80.4 (7.5)SBP ≥ 140
DBP ≥ 90		Positive AHT
Hypertensive Woman1166.1 (5.6) 14.6 (2)146 (13)81 (7)
Normotensive Man3066.8 (6.7) 16.9 (2.6)123 (10)72 (7)
Normotensive Woman2665.1 (6.6) 17 (2.8)117 (11)67 (7)
Saxby et al., 2003 [48]C-cHypertensive25074 (4)4710 (2)165 (8)89 (7)SBP ≥ 160–79
DBP ≥ 90–99		Positive AHT
Normotensive25674 (4)5610 (2)131 (11)74 (7)
Harrington et al., 2000 [49] C-cHypertensive10776 (4)4910 (2)164 (9)89 (7)SBP ≥ 160
DBP ≥ 90		Positive AHT
Normotensive11676 (4)4910 (2)131 (10)74 (7)
M: Median; SD: standard deviation; EDU: Years Education; SBP: Systolic Blood Pressure; DBP: Diastolic Blood Pressure; PP: Pulse Pressure; AHT: Arterial hypertension; C-s: Cross-sectional study; C: Cohort study; C-c: Case-control study; BP; Blood Pressure; A: antihypertensive use; DM: Diagnosed by Medical.
Table
Table 2. Cognitive processes included in the studies of blood pressure and cognitive performance in older adults.
Table 2. Cognitive processes included in the studies of blood pressure and cognitive performance in older adults.
StudyExecutive FunctionsWork MemoryProcessing SpeedCognitive InhibitionShort-Term Memory and LearningDiffered MemoryReasoning
Kritz-Silverstein et al., 2017 [40]PVF
SVF 		TMTB * WL (10)
MV		MV (30 min)
Fischer et al. 2016 [34]DSB+
LNS + DEFS *		 WL (16)DWL (20 min)
Cherbuin et al., 2015 [47]PVFDSBSDMT TMTA TMTB WL (16) PDLW (20 min) P
Okusaga et al., 2013 [44]VF DSS
TMTA		 WL (15) + WL (20 min) * RM
Dregan et al. 2013 [43]SVF + LCT WL (10) + DWL *
Nation et al., 2010 [56]WCST + TMTB + VF
D + VF *		 TMTA HM + DHM + WL + DWL BD
Whitfield et al., 2008 [41] AFDSS * HM **HM (10 min)
Singh-Manoux, et al., 2005 [35]PVF * SVF * WL (20) MR
Robbins et al., 2005 [54] DSBDSS * BD *
ST *
Waldstein, Giggey et al., 2005 [51] PVF SVF *DSB
TMTBu		TMTAu WL (16) + DWL *
VM + DVM *
Hebert et al., 2004 [45]SDMT + MMSE + EBMTu -
Ellias et al. 2004 [50] DSS Ar + DSB + DSF PC + PA + BD + OA *
Steward et al., 2003 [53] TMT A WL (10) DWL (2 min)
Izquierdo-Porrera & Waldstein, 2002 [33] DSB WL (10)DWL (7 min)CLOX
Morris et al., 2002 [32] SDMTu EBMTuEBMTu
Wei et al., 2018 [42]TO + R7 + IC * WL (10) + DWL (4 min) *
Yeung et al.,2017 [52]PVF SVF *TMTBDSSSCWWL (16)DWL (20 min)EPS *
Nguyen et al., 2017 [55] WL (12) *DWL (30 min)
RCFd		RCFi *
Hudak et al., 2013 [37] TMTB *TMTA *
DSS *
UFOV *
LC *
MC *		 WL (12) DWL (30 min)
Yasar et al., 2011 [38]PVF + SVF+TMTB *TMTA * WL (12) *DWL (20 min)
Bucur & Madden., 2010 [46]TMTA-TMTB + SCW DSS
Brady et al., 2005 [39]SVFDSBSC WL (10)DWL (5 min)
Waldstein, Brown et al., 2005 [31] DSB TMTB *TMTA *
MSM *		SCWHM
VM *		DHM (30 min)
DVM * (30 min)
Waldstein & Katzel, 2004 [36] DSB VMSB *MSM * HM
VM		DHM (30 min)
DVM (30 min)
Saxby et al., 2003 [48]TMTA + TMTB + SVF + PVF *NWM *RT * WL (12) + DWL + RWL + DRWL *
Harrington et al., 2000 [49] CDRCDR
* Significant difference; P: Significant positive correlation: u: Significant u-shaped correlation: + Compound measures; VF: Verbal Fluence; PVF: Phonological verbal fluency; SVF: Semantic verbal fluency; WCST: Wisconsin card test; LNS: Letter Number Sequence; LCT: letter cancellation test; TO: Temporal orientation; S7: Subtract 7 by 7; IC: Image copy; TMTB: Trail Making Test B; TMTA: Trail Making Test A; DSB: Digit Span Backwards; DSF: Digit Span Forward; NWM: Numeric work memory; Ar: Arithmetic; AF: Alpha Span; VMSB: Visual memory Span Backwards; DSS: Digit-symbol substitution; MSM: Manual speed motor; RT: Reaction time in retention and memory tests; SC: Stroop color; SCW: Stroop color-word; SDMT: Symbol Digit Modalities Test; LC: Letter comparison; WL: Wordlist (number of words); DWL: Delayed wordlist (waiting time); HM: History memory; DHM: Delayed history memory; VM: Visual memory; DVM: Delayed visual memory; EBMT: East Boston Memory Test; CDR: Cognitive Drug Research Computerized Assessment; RCFi: Rey complex figure test- immediate; RCFd: Rey Complex Figure Test-delayed; RM: Raven Matrices; MR: Mathematical Reasoning; BD: Blok Desing; PC: Picture Completion; PA: Picture arrangement; OA: Object Assembly; CLOX: Clok Drawing Test; EPS: Every problem solving test.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sánchez-Nieto, J.M.; Rivera-Sánchez, U.D.; Mendoza-Núñez, V.M. Relationship between Arterial Hypertension with Cognitive Performance in Elderly. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111445

AMA Style

Sánchez-Nieto JM, Rivera-Sánchez UD, Mendoza-Núñez VM. Relationship between Arterial Hypertension with Cognitive Performance in Elderly. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Brain Sciences. 2021; 11(11):1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111445

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sánchez-Nieto, José Miguel, Uriel Dagoberto Rivera-Sánchez, and Víctor Manuel Mendoza-Núñez. 2021. "Relationship between Arterial Hypertension with Cognitive Performance in Elderly. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" Brain Sciences 11, no. 11: 1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111445

APA Style

Sánchez-Nieto, J. M., Rivera-Sánchez, U. D., & Mendoza-Núñez, V. M. (2021). Relationship between Arterial Hypertension with Cognitive Performance in Elderly. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Brain Sciences, 11(11), 1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111445

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop