Olofsson P, Persson K
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Lund, General Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1995 Jul;74(6):429-33. doi: 10.3109/00016349509024404.
To map the conformity between 24-hour and conventional blood pressure (BP) monitoring (24BPM, CBPM) in pregnancy.
Prospective comparative.
A standardized single BP measurement and parallel 24BPM and CBPM were carried out in 99 women (125 recordings) hospitalized for hypertension.
Except for BP oscillation amplitude, corresponding variables correlated significantly between the methods. The mean systolic BP (SBP) was significantly higher with 24BPM compared with both CBPM (3.1 mmHg) and with the single BP measurement (4.6 mmHg). The mean diastolic BP (DBP) was significantly lower with 24BPM compared with CBPM (2.4 mmHg) and with the single measurement (2.7 mmHg). If a cut-off at 140/90 mmHg had been used for the diagnosis of hypertension and with 24BPM as the golden standard, a false positive/negative diagnosis would have resulted in 35%/20% of cases with the single BP measurement, and in 24%/17% with CBPM.
24BPM and CBPM gave significantly correlated but different values of the BP. The differences were small in terms of absolute mm Hg values, but resulted in a high rate of false positive and false negative diagnoses of hypertension. 24BPM cannot substitute the traditional methods for BP monitoring in pregnancy unless a new definition of hypertension is established.
绘制孕期24小时血压监测与传统血压监测(24小时动态血压监测、常规血压监测)之间的一致性。
前瞻性比较研究。
对99名因高血压住院的女性(125次记录)进行标准化单次血压测量以及同步的24小时动态血压监测和常规血压监测。
除血压振荡幅度外,两种方法的相应变量之间存在显著相关性。与常规血压监测(相差3.1 mmHg)和单次血压测量(相差4.6 mmHg)相比,24小时动态血压监测的平均收缩压显著更高。与常规血压监测(相差2.4 mmHg)和单次测量(相差2.7 mmHg)相比,24小时动态血压监测的平均舒张压显著更低。如果以140/90 mmHg作为高血压诊断的临界值,并以24小时动态血压监测作为金标准,单次血压测量会导致35%的病例出现假阳性/阴性诊断,常规血压监测则为24%/17%。
24小时动态血压监测和常规血压监测得出的血压值显著相关但不同。就绝对毫米汞柱值而言差异较小,但导致高血压假阳性和假阴性诊断的比例较高。除非建立新的高血压定义,否则24小时动态血压监测不能替代孕期传统的血压监测方法。