Mallion J M, Asmar R, Ambrosioni E, MacMahon M, Coupez J M, de Cordoüe A, Barrandon S, Brault Y, Guez D, Safar M
Service de médecine interne et cardiologie, CHU de Grenoble, France.
Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1996 Sep;89 Spec No 4:27-38.
Because of the high variability of casual blood pressure measurements. ABPM has become a complementary clinical tool for evaluating antihypertensive treatment. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of practical guidelines to interpret the data. A review of the literature shows that ABPM efficacy data are analyzed differently, especially the trough-to-peak ratio proposed by the Food and Drug Administration. Published trough-to-peak ratios are widely disparate due to the diversity of the calculation methods which are most often not justified. Thus inappropriate comparisons of these results can easily produce incorrect conclusions. The aim of this review is to select, through the literature, basic methodological requirements commonly agreed on for accurate assessment of trough-to-peak ratio, and to apply them to the ABPM data on indapamide, a diuretic related to the thiazides. Six methodological requirements commonly agreed on at this time are the following: 1. study design: placebo-controlled study with a placebo run-in period; 2. patients selection: compliance with the study protocol, record obtained before and after treatment for each patient; 3. population analysis: whole and responder population: 4. quality control of the records: 5. placebo effect subtraction; 6. global and individual calculation with the indication of median values. Given that, no T/P ratio, especially for a diuretic, has yet been calculated according to these requirements, the above methodological points were taken into account for the T/P calculation of indapamide, from a placebo-controlled dose-finding study involving 285 patients.
由于偶测血压的高度变异性,动态血压监测(ABPM)已成为评估降压治疗的一种辅助临床工具。然而,目前仍缺乏解释这些数据的实用指南。文献综述表明,对ABPM疗效数据的分析方法各异,尤其是美国食品药品监督管理局提出的谷峰比值。由于计算方法多样且大多不合理,已发表的谷峰比值差异很大。因此,对这些结果进行不恰当的比较很容易得出错误结论。本综述的目的是通过文献筛选出准确评估谷峰比值时普遍认可的基本方法要求,并将其应用于吲达帕胺(一种与噻嗪类相关的利尿剂)的ABPM数据。目前普遍认可的六项方法要求如下:1. 研究设计:采用安慰剂导入期的安慰剂对照研究;2. 患者选择:遵守研究方案,记录每位患者治疗前后的数据;3. 人群分析:总体人群和有效人群;4. 记录的质量控制;5. 减去安慰剂效应;6. 进行总体和个体计算并标明中位数。鉴于尚无按照这些要求计算的谷峰比值,尤其是利尿剂的谷峰比值,在一项涉及285名患者的安慰剂对照剂量探索研究中,在计算吲达帕胺的谷峰比值时考虑了上述方法要点。