Cuspidi C, Lonati L, Sampieri L, Macca G, Valagussa L, Zaro T, Michev I, Salerno M, Leonetti G, Zanchetti A
Istituto di Clinica Medica Generale e Terapia Medica, Centro di Fisiologia Clinica e lpertensione, Università di Milano, Italy.
J Hypertens. 1999 Jun;17(6):835-41. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199917060-00016.
First, to evaluate the prevalence of clinic blood pressure (BP) control (BP < or = 140/90 mm Hg) in a representative sample of treated hypertensive patients followed in our hypertension clinic. Second, to assess in a subgroup of these patients: (a) the proportion of BP control with both clinic blood pressure (CBP < or =140/90 mm Hg) and daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) (< or =132/85 mm Hg) criteria, and (b) the prevalence of echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (left ventricular mass index, LVMI>125 g/m2 in men and >110 g/m2 in women).
Seven hundred consecutive hypertensive patients who attended our hypertension centre clinic during a period of 6 months and who had regularly been followed up by the same medical team were included in the study. BP was taken in the clinic by a doctor using a mercury sphygmomanometer with the participants seated. Seventy-four patients with similar demographic and clinical characteristics to the entire population of participants underwent complete echocardiographic examination and 24 h ABP monitoring.
During follow-up, 352 of the treated patients had clinic BP < or =140/90 mm Hg, 198< or =160/95 mm Hg and 150>160/95 mm Hg, indicating that BP control was satisfactory in 50.3%, borderline in 28.3% and unsatisfactory in 21.4% of the cases. In the subgroup of 74 patients, the proportion of individuals with satisfactory clinic BP control (CBP< or =140/90 mm Hg) was higher (50.0 versus 33.6%) than with satisfactory ABP control (daytime ABP values < or =132/85 mm Hg). LVH was found in 21 of the 74 patients (28.3%): 12 of them had unsatisfactory CBP control and 19 had unsatisfactory ABP control. LVMI did not correlate with CBP values but only with ABP values (mean 24 h systolic r = 0.47, diastolic r = 0.40, P<0.001; mean daytime systolic r = 0.45, mean daytime diastolic r = 0.39, P<0.001; mean night-time systolic r = 0.38, mean night-time diastolic r = 0.38, P<0.001).
This study demonstrates that hypertensive patients managed in a hypertension centre clinic have satisfactory CBP control in 50% of cases, but this rate seems to over-estimate the effective BP control during daily life. A large fraction of patients show persistence of LVH and this evidence of organ damage almost entirely concerns individuals with poor ABP control.
第一,评估在我们高血压门诊接受治疗的高血压患者代表性样本中诊室血压(BP)控制(BP≤140/90mmHg)的患病率。第二,在这些患者的一个亚组中评估:(a)同时符合诊室血压(CBP≤140/90mmHg)和日间动态血压(ABP)(≤132/85mmHg)标准的血压控制比例,以及(b)超声心动图左心室肥厚(LVH)的患病率(男性左心室质量指数,LVMI>125g/m²,女性>110g/m²)。
本研究纳入了在6个月期间连续就诊于我们高血压中心门诊且由同一医疗团队定期随访的700例高血压患者。医生使用汞柱式血压计在诊室为坐位的参与者测量血压。74例具有与所有参与者相似人口统计学和临床特征的患者接受了完整的超声心动图检查和24小时ABP监测。
在随访期间,352例接受治疗的患者诊室血压≤140/90mmHg,198例≤160/95mmHg,150例>160/95mmHg,表明50.3%的病例血压控制良好,28.3%为临界值,21.4%控制不佳。在74例患者的亚组中,诊室血压控制良好(CBP≤140/90mmHg)的个体比例(50.0%对33.6%)高于动态血压控制良好(日间ABP值≤132/85mmHg)的个体比例。74例患者中有21例(28.3%)发现有LVH:其中12例CBP控制不佳,19例ABP控制不佳。LVMI与CBP值无关,仅与ABP值相关(24小时平均收缩压r = 0.47,舒张压r = 0.40,P<0.001;日间平均收缩压r = 0.45,日间平均舒张压r = 0.39,P<0.001;夜间平均收缩压r = 0.38,夜间平均舒张压r = 0.38,P<0.001)。
本研究表明,在高血压中心门诊接受管理的高血压患者中,50%的病例诊室血压控制良好,但该比例似乎高估了日常生活中的有效血压控制情况。很大一部分患者存在LVH持续现象,这种器官损害的证据几乎完全涉及ABP控制不佳的个体。