Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine.
Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, and.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018 Mar 7;13(3):422-428. doi: 10.2215/CJN.09630917. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
Our objective was to determine whether clinic BPs (taken at either a single visit or two sequential visits) are inferior to ambulatory BPs in their ability to discriminate risk of adverse outcomes in children with CKD.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We included 513 participants of the CKD in Children Study who had clinic BPs and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring performed during similar timeframes. Predictors of interest were systolic BPs taken at a single visit or two repeated visits within a 1-year period compared with mean wake and sleep systolic ambulatory BPs. Outcomes were left ventricular hypertrophy and ESKD. We determined the ability for each BP parameter to provide risk discrimination using statistics.
During mean follow-up of 3.5 years, 123 participants developed ESKD. In cross-sectional unadjusted analysis, every 0.1 increase in systolic BP index was associated with a 2.0 times higher odds of left ventricular hypertrophy (95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 2.8) by clinic BPs versus 1.8 times higher odds (95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 2.4) by ambulatory wake BP. The statistic was highest for clinic BP (=0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.73) but similar to ambulatory wake BP (=0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.71) for the discrimination of left ventricular hypertrophy. In longitudinal unadjusted analysis, every 0.1 increase in systolic BP index was associated with a higher risk of ESKD using repeated clinic (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 1.8) versus ambulatory wake BP (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 2.0). Unadjusted statistics were the same for wake (=0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.67) and clinic systolic BPs (=0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.66) for discriminating risk of ESKD.
Clinic BPs taken in a protocol-driven setting are not consistently inferior to ambulatory BP in the discrimination of BP-related adverse outcomes in children with CKD.
我们的目的是确定诊所血压(单次就诊或两次连续就诊时测量)在识别患有 CKD 的儿童发生不良结局的风险方面是否不如动态血压。
设计、地点、参与者和测量方法:我们纳入了 CKD 儿童研究中的 513 名参与者,这些参与者在相似时间内接受了诊所血压测量和 24 小时动态血压监测。感兴趣的预测因素是在 1 年内单次就诊或两次重复就诊时的收缩压,与清醒和睡眠时的平均收缩压动态血压进行比较。结局为左心室肥厚和终末期肾病。我们使用统计学来确定每个血压参数提供风险区分的能力。
在平均 3.5 年的随访期间,123 名参与者发展为终末期肾病。在横断面未调整分析中,诊所收缩压指数每增加 0.1,与左心室肥厚的发生风险增加 2.0 倍相关(95%置信区间,1.5 至 2.8),而动态清醒时血压的发生风险增加 1.8 倍(95%置信区间,1.3 至 2.4)。诊所血压的统计效能最高(=0.65;95%置信区间,0.58 至 0.73),但与动态清醒时血压相似(=0.64;95%置信区间,0.57 至 0.71),均可用于左心室肥厚的风险区分。在未调整的纵向分析中,诊所收缩压指数每增加 0.1,与使用重复诊所血压(风险比,1.5;95%置信区间,1.3 至 1.8)相比,发生终末期肾病的风险更高,而与动态清醒时血压(风险比,1.6;95%置信区间,1.3 至 2.0)相比。未调整的统计效能在清醒时(=0.61;95%置信区间,0.56 至 0.67)和诊所收缩压(=0.61;95%置信区间,0.55 至 0.66)之间相同,用于区分终末期肾病的风险。
在识别患有 CKD 的儿童中与血压相关的不良结局方面,在方案驱动的环境下测量的诊所血压并不总是劣于动态血压。