White W B
Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington.
Clin Invest Med. 1991 Jun;14(3):224-30.
Casual (or office) blood pressure values have been shown to be associated with cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in a variety of prospective trials assessing cardiovascular risk. In recent years, however, controversies have developed regarding the capacity of casual blood pressures to predict cardiovascular risk in an individual patient with high blood pressure. Prospective, cross-sectional studies have been performed in several centres that compare the capacity to predict hypertensive target organ involvement by casual vs 24-h mean, awake, or sleep blood pressures. Ambulatory blood pressure has been consistently superior to casual blood pressure in predicting target organ involvement in hypertension. As most of the data collected to date has involved cardiac studies, however, fewer conclusions can be drawn regarding renal and cerebrovascular disease. With regard to cardiac structure and/or function, ambulatory blood pressure is much more useful than casual blood pressure in determining the likelihood of an abnormal index in an individual patient with hypertension.
在各种评估心血管风险的前瞻性试验中，偶测（或诊室）血压值已被证明与心血管发病率或死亡率相关。然而，近年来，对于偶测血压预测个体高血压患者心血管风险的能力存在争议。多个中心开展了前瞻性横断面研究，比较偶测血压与24小时平均血压、清醒时血压或睡眠血压预测高血压靶器官受累的能力。在预测高血压靶器官受累方面，动态血压一直优于偶测血压。然而，由于迄今为止收集的大多数数据都涉及心脏研究，因此关于肾脏和脑血管疾病的结论较少。关于心脏结构和/或功能，动态血压在确定个体高血压患者指标异常的可能性方面比偶测血压更有用。
