Suppr超能文献

通过动态血压与家庭血压监测评估的隐匿性高血压:是同一现象吗?

Masked hypertension assessed by ambulatory blood pressure versus home blood pressure monitoring: is it the same phenomenon?

作者信息

Stergiou George S, Salgami Eleanna V, Tzamouranis Dimitris G, Roussias Leonidas G

机构信息

Hypertension Center, Third University Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens 11527, Greece.

出版信息

Am J Hypertens. 2005 Jun;18(6):772-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.01.003.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Masked hypertension is defined as normal clinic blood pressure (CBP) and elevated out-of-clinic blood pressure assessed using either self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) by the patients at home (HBP) or ambulatory BP (ABP) monitoring. This study investigated the level of agreement between ABP and HBP in the diagnosis of masked hypertension.

METHODS

Participants referred to an outpatient hypertension clinic had measurements of CBP (two visits), HBP (4 days), and ABP (24 h). The diagnosis of masked hypertension based on HBP (CBP <140/90 mm Hg and HBP > or =135/85) versus ABP (CBP <140/90 and awake ABP > or =135/85) was compared.

RESULTS

A total of 438 subjects were included (mean age +/- SD, 51.5 +/- 11.6 years; 59% men and 41% women, 34% treated and 66% untreated). Similar proportions of subjects with masked hypertension were diagnosed by ABP (14.2%) and HBP (11.9%). In both treated and untreated subjects, the masked hypertension phenomenon was as common as the white coat phenomenon. Among 132 subjects with normal CBP, there was disagreement in the diagnosis of masked hypertension between the HBP and the ABP method in 23% of subjects for systolic and 30% for diastolic BP (kappa 0.56). When a 5-mm Hg gray zone for uncertain diagnosis was applied to the diagnostic threshold, the disagreement was reduced to 9% and 6% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar proportions of subjects with masked hypertension are detected by ABP and HBP monitoring. Although disagreement in the diagnosis between the two methods is not uncommon, in the majority of these cases the deviation of the diagnostic BP above the threshold in not clinically important. Both ABP and HBP monitoring appear to be appropriate methods for the detection of masked hypertension.

摘要

背景

隐匿性高血压定义为诊所血压(CBP)正常,但通过患者在家自行监测血压(HBP)或动态血压(ABP)监测评估得出的诊室外血压升高。本研究调查了ABP与HBP在隐匿性高血压诊断中的一致性水平。

方法

转诊至门诊高血压诊所的参与者接受了CBP测量(两次就诊)、HBP测量(4天)和ABP测量(24小时)。比较了基于HBP(CBP<140/90 mmHg且HBP≥135/85)与ABP(CBP<140/90且清醒时ABP≥135/85)对隐匿性高血压的诊断。

结果

共纳入438名受试者(平均年龄±标准差,51.5±11.6岁;男性59%,女性41%,34%接受治疗,66%未接受治疗)。通过ABP(14.2%)和HBP(11.9%)诊断出的隐匿性高血压受试者比例相似。在接受治疗和未接受治疗的受试者中,隐匿性高血压现象与白大衣现象一样常见。在132名CBP正常的受试者中,HBP与ABP方法在隐匿性高血压诊断上存在分歧,收缩压方面为23%的受试者,舒张压方面为30%的受试者(kappa值为0.56)。当将5 mmHg的不确定诊断灰色区域应用于诊断阈值时,分歧分别降至9%和6%。

结论

通过ABP和HBP监测检测出的隐匿性高血压受试者比例相似。尽管两种方法在诊断上存在分歧并不罕见,但在大多数情况下,诊断血压高于阈值的偏差在临床上并不重要。ABP和HBP监测似乎都是检测隐匿性高血压的合适方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验