Suppr超能文献

根据肱动脉血压分类的已治疗高血压患者的动脉僵硬度和中心血流动力学

Arterial stiffness and central hemodynamics in treated hypertensive subjects according to brachial blood pressure classification.

作者信息

Safar Michel E, Blacher Jacques, Protogerou Athanase, Achimastos Apostolos

机构信息

AP-HP Diagnosis Center, Hôtel-Dieu Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Paris-Descartes University, Paris, France. michel.safarhtd.aphp.fr

出版信息

J Hypertens. 2008 Jan;26(1):130-7. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282f16a9c.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

International recommendations have classified brachial blood pressure (BP) in subgroups enabling better cardiovascular risk stratification. Central BP is an independent predictor of cardiovascular risk, differing from brachial BP through the predominant influence of arterial stiffness and wave reflections. Central BP has never been studied in relation to international guidelines for brachial BP classification.

METHODS

In 580 chronically treated hypertensive subjects we measured: carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), carotid artery augmentation index (AI) and carotid blood pressures, using applanation tonometry and pulse wave analysis, and using brachial BP for carotid pressure wave calibration.

RESULTS

For each given brachial value, carotid systolic blood pressure (SBP) and PP were significantly lower than the corresponding brachial SBP and PP. This pressure amplification was significantly lower in the 'optimal' and 'normal' BP ranges (6.8-7.4 mmHg) than in the higher BP ranges (10.1-11.3 mmHg), mainly depending on heart rate (HR) and PWV levels. PWV gradually increased as a function of brachial BP classification and was a significant predictor of this classification independently of age, drug treatment, atherosclerotic lesions and even mean BP. Finally, PWV was a highly sensitive marker of the effective BP control throughout all decades of age.

CONCLUSION

Under chronic antihypertensive therapy, central BP does not strictly parallel the corresponding brachial BP classification, depending on differences in aortic stiffness and HR. Whether aortic PWV might predict the brachial BP classification and/or the presence of effective BP control, as suggested in this study, needs further confirmation.

摘要

背景

国际指南已将肱动脉血压(BP)分为不同亚组,以实现更好的心血管风险分层。中心血压是心血管风险的独立预测指标,与肱动脉血压不同,其主要受动脉僵硬度和波反射的影响。中心血压从未与肱动脉血压分类的国际指南相关联进行过研究。

方法

在580例接受长期治疗的高血压患者中,我们使用压平式眼压计和脉搏波分析测量了:颈股脉搏波速度(PWV)、颈动脉增强指数(AI)和颈动脉血压,并使用肱动脉血压对颈动脉压力波进行校准。

结果

对于每个给定的肱动脉血压值,颈动脉收缩压(SBP)和脉压(PP)均显著低于相应的肱动脉SBP和PP。这种压力放大在“最佳”和“正常”血压范围(6.8 - 7.4 mmHg)中显著低于较高血压范围(10.1 - 11.3 mmHg),主要取决于心率(HR)和PWV水平。PWV随着肱动脉血压分类而逐渐升高,并且是该分类的显著预测指标,独立于年龄、药物治疗、动脉粥样硬化病变甚至平均血压。最后,PWV是所有年龄段有效血压控制的高度敏感标志物。

结论

在慢性抗高血压治疗下,中心血压并不严格与相应的肱动脉血压分类平行,这取决于主动脉僵硬度和HR的差异。本研究中提出的主动脉PWV是否可预测肱动脉血压分类和/或有效血压控制的存在,需要进一步证实。

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