Suppr超能文献

动态动脉僵硬度指数及其在评估透析患者动脉僵硬度中的作用。

Ambulatory arterial stiffness index and its role in assessing arterial stiffness in dialysis patients.

作者信息

Liu Wenjin, Zhou Jiajun, Chen Jianping, Meng Meijuan, Li Xiurong, Gao Chaoqing, Zhou Jianmei, Wang Liang, Sun Zhuxing, Chu Hong, Fan Wei, Bai Youwei, Yang Junwei

机构信息

aCenter for Kidney Disease, Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, NanjingbDepartment of Hemodialysis, Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College, WuhucDepartment of Statistics Analysis, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing University Medical School, NanjingdDepartment of Blood Purification, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, ChangzhoueDepartment of Nephrology, Wuxi People's Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, WuxifDepartment of Nephrology, Affiliated Yixing People's Hospital, Jiangsu University, YixinggDepartment of Nephrology, Luan People's Hospital, Luan, China.

出版信息

J Hypertens. 2017 Jun;35(6):1297-1301. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001309.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) is a parameter derived from ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) readings. It is calculated as 1 minus the linear slope of DBP on SBP. We tested its value in assessing arterial stiffness in dialysis patients.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the baseline data from a cohort study. A total of 344 patients on maintenance hemodialysis from six tertiary hospitals were included. All patients underwent ABP monitoring and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) measurement. Clinical determinants of AASI were analyzed, and the ability of AASI for assessing arterial stiffness was compared with ambulatory pulse pressure (PP).

RESULTS

Multiple regression analysis revealed that ambulatory PP (β = 0.003), current smoker (β = -0.069), age (β = 0.003) and ambulatory SBP (β = 0.001) were independent determinants of AASI. Ambulatory PP correlates better with cfPWV than AASI (r = 0.28 for AASI and 0.59 for PP; P for difference: <0.001). When cfPWV was treated as a categorical variable, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis also showed a more potent predictive value of PP over AASI (area under the curve: 0.64 for AASI, 0.80 for PP; P for difference: <0.001). Net reclassification improvement and integrated discrimination improvement analysis demonstrated no added predictive value of AASI to PP (net reclassification improvement = -2.2%, P = 0.26; integrated discrimination improvement = 0.001, P = 0.51). Sensitivity analysis in patients with more ABP readings (≥49) yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

For dialysis patients, AASI has very limited value in assessing arterial stiffness, whether used alone or added to PP. Our results suggest that this index should not be used as a surrogate marker of arterial stiffness for dialysis patients in future practice and studies.

摘要

目的

动态动脉硬化指数(AASI)是一种从动态血压(ABP)读数中得出的参数。其计算方法为1减去舒张压(DBP)对收缩压(SBP)的线性斜率。我们测试了其在评估透析患者动脉僵硬度方面的价值。

方法

我们对一项队列研究的基线数据进行了横断面分析。纳入了来自六家三级医院的344例维持性血液透析患者。所有患者均接受了ABP监测和颈股脉搏波速度(cfPWV)测量。分析了AASI的临床决定因素,并将AASI评估动脉僵硬度的能力与动态脉压(PP)进行了比较。

结果

多元回归分析显示,动态PP(β = 0.003)、当前吸烟者(β = -0.069)、年龄(β = 0.003)和动态SBP(β = 0.001)是AASI的独立决定因素。动态PP与cfPWV的相关性比AASI更好(AASI的r = 0.28,PP的r = 0.59;差异的P值:<0.001)。当将cfPWV视为分类变量时,受试者工作特征曲线分析也显示PP对动脉僵硬度的预测价值比AASI更强(曲线下面积:AASI为0.64,PP为0.80;差异的P值:<0.001)。净重新分类改善和综合鉴别改善分析表明,AASI对PP没有额外的预测价值(净重新分类改善 = -2.2%,P = 0.26;综合鉴别改善 = 0.001,P = 0.51)。对ABP读数更多(≥49次)的患者进行的敏感性分析得出了类似的结果。

结论

对于透析患者,AASI在评估动脉僵硬度方面的价值非常有限,无论是单独使用还是与PP联合使用。我们的结果表明,在未来的实践和研究中,该指标不应被用作透析患者动脉僵硬度的替代标志物。

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