Suppr超能文献

慢性血液透析患者的脉压与全因死亡率及心血管事件风险

Pulse pressure and risk of total mortality and cardiovascular events in patients on chronic hemodialysis.

作者信息

Tozawa Masahiko, Iseki Kunitoshi, Iseki Chiho, Takishita Shuichi

机构信息

Third Department of Internal Medicine and Dialysis Unit, University of The Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan.

出版信息

Kidney Int. 2002 Feb;61(2):717-26. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00173.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pulse pressure (PP) has been shown as a risk factor for mortality or cardiovascular events in several studies. However, the impact of PP on prognosis in a cohort of chronic hemodialysis patients has not been sufficiently studied. We examined the effect of PP on total mortality and cardiovascular events in chronic hemodialysis patients, and whether PP adds useful value to systolic blood pressure (SBP) or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for predicting total mortality and cardiovascular events in chronic hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

Chronic hemodialysis patients (N=1243, 720 men, 523 women) alive on January 1, 1991 at baseline were involved in this study. Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, and other risk factors, was used to assess the relation between blood pressure components and risk of death and cardiovascular events over a nine-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The association with the risk of total mortality was positive for PP (P=0.002) and SBP (P=0.04), but not significant for DBP (P=0.4), considering each pressure individually (single blood pressure component model, SPM); of the three measurements, PP yielded the highest chi2 value. When SBP and DBP were jointly entered into the Cox regression model (dual blood pressure component model, DPM), the association with the risk of total mortality was positive for SBP (HR, 1.083; 95% CI, 1.030 to 1.137) and negative for DBP (HR, 0.886; 0.808 to 0.970). After the addition of diabetes mellitus as an adjusted variable to the model, PP was not a significant predictor for total mortality; PP was a significant predictor for total mortality in non-diabetic patients, but not in diabetic patients. PP was positively associated with the risk of stroke, and stroke and AMI; however, predictive value of PP for each endpoint was not superior to SBP and DBP in SPM. In DPM with SBP and DBP, the association with the risk of stroke and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was positive for SBP (P=0.02) but not significant for DBP (P=0.5). In DPM with SBP and PP, the association with the risk of stroke and AMI was positive for SBP (P=0.01) but not significant for PP (P=0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In non-diabetic patients on chronic hemodialysis, PP was an independent predictor of total mortality. PP was more potent predictor of total mortality than SBP or DBP. For predicting cardiovascular events, SBP was superior to PP or DBP.

摘要

背景

多项研究表明脉压(PP)是死亡率或心血管事件的一个危险因素。然而,PP对慢性血液透析患者队列预后的影响尚未得到充分研究。我们研究了PP对慢性血液透析患者全因死亡率和心血管事件的影响,以及PP在预测慢性血液透析患者全因死亡率和心血管事件方面是否比收缩压(SBP)或舒张压(DBP)更具实用价值。

方法

本研究纳入了1991年1月1日基线时存活的慢性血液透析患者(N = 1243,男性720例,女性523例)。采用经年龄、性别和其他危险因素校正的Cox回归分析,评估在9年随访期间血压成分与死亡风险和心血管事件之间的关系。

结果

单独考虑每个血压值时(单血压成分模型,SPM),PP(P = 0.002)和SBP(P = 0.04)与全因死亡风险呈正相关,而DBP与全因死亡风险无显著相关性(P = 0.4);在这三项测量值中,PP的卡方值最高。当将SBP和DBP共同纳入Cox回归模型时(双血压成分模型,DPM),SBP与全因死亡风险呈正相关(HR,1.083;95%CI,1.030至1.137),而DBP与全因死亡风险呈负相关(HR,0.886;0.808至0.970)。在模型中加入糖尿病作为校正变量后,PP不是全因死亡率的显著预测因素;PP在非糖尿病患者中是全因死亡率的显著预测因素,但在糖尿病患者中不是。PP与中风、中风和急性心肌梗死(AMI)的风险呈正相关;然而,在SPM中,PP对每个终点的预测价值并不优于SBP和DBP。在包含SBP和DBP的DPM中,SBP与中风和急性心肌梗死(AMI)风险呈正相关(P = 0.02),而DBP与中风和急性心肌梗死风险无显著相关性(P = 0.5)。在包含SBP和PP的DPM中,SBP与中风和AMI风险呈正相关(P = 0.01),而PP与中风和AMI风险无显著相关性(P = 0.5)。

结论

在接受慢性血液透析的非糖尿病患者中,PP是全因死亡率的独立预测因素。PP比SBP或DBP更能有效预测全因死亡率。对于预测心血管事件,SBP优于PP或DBP。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验