Majahalme S, Turjanmaa V, Tuomisto M, Lu H, Uusitalo A
Department of Medicine, Medical School, University of Tampere, Finland.
Am J Hypertens. 1997 Jan;10(1):106-16. doi: 10.1016/s0895-7061(96)00298-1.
There is considerable disagreement in the literature on the clinical usefulness of exercise testing as a tool for prediction of future hypertension. Much of the discrepancy between various reports is attributable to the difficulties of blood pressure (BP) measurement during exercise. Therefore, we investigated whether accurate intraarterial BP measurement will increase the predictive power of exercise testing. The BP responses to dynamic and isometric exercise were evaluated in 97 healthy, unmedicated men, of whom 34 were normotensive (NT), 29 borderline (BHT), and 34 mildly hypertensive (HT) using three criteria: 1) achieved BP during the test, 2) the change of the BP from baseline to exercise, and 3) the group was divided into high responders (HIGH, n = 19, systolic BP > or = 220 and diastolic BP > or = 105 mm Hg) and normal responders (n = 60). Five years later the BP was reassessed by casual measurements and noninvasive ambulatory 24-h monitoring (NAMB) in 79 (81%; 27 NT, 24 BHT, and 28 HT) subjects. The achieved isometric BP correlated well with the follow-up BP (casual systolic BP r = 0.43, diastolic BP r = 0.45, and NAMB systolic BP r = 0.44, diastolic BP r = 0.58, P < .001). However, achieved dynamic BP showed a poorer relationship to future BP (r range, 0.09 to 31, P = NS to P < .01). Because the intraarterial preexercise sitting BP also correlated well with follow-up BP (r range, 0.33 to 0.48, P < .01 to P < .001), and the r values were close to those of achieved isometric BP we used multiple regressions (including all resting and exercise BP values as independent variables) to evaluate the contributions of the baseline and exercise values for prediction of the follow-up BP. The baseline value explained 12% to 23% (from casual diastolic BP to NAMB diastolic BP, systolic BP values) of future BP variance, whereas achieved isometric BP ranged an additional 1% to 11% (from casual systolic BP to NAMB diastolic BP) of variance. In general, BP change from baseline with stressors did not correlate with follow-up measurements. In the high responder group the achieved dynamic BP did not correlate significantly with the follow-up BP, whereas the achieved isometric diastolic BP did correlate (casual diastolic BP r = 0.56, P < .05, NAMB systolic BP and diastolic BP r = 0.52, P < .05). Both groups had similar future BP levels. In conclusion, even with very accurate BP readings the reactivity to dynamic exercise is a weak predictor of future BP, and does not improve the prediction compared to resting BP values. Intraarterial BP response to isometric exercise marginally improves the prediction of future BP levels.
关于运动测试作为预测未来高血压工具的临床实用性,文献中存在相当大的分歧。各种报告之间的许多差异归因于运动期间血压(BP)测量的困难。因此,我们研究了准确的动脉内血压测量是否会提高运动测试的预测能力。使用三个标准对97名健康、未用药的男性进行了动态和等长运动的血压反应评估,其中34名血压正常(NT),29名临界高血压(BHT),34名轻度高血压(HT):1)测试期间达到的血压;2)血压从基线到运动时的变化;3)将该组分为高反应者(HIGH,n = 19,收缩压≥220且舒张压≥105 mmHg)和正常反应者(n = 60)。五年后,对79名(81%;27名NT,24名BHT和28名HT)受试者进行了偶然测量和无创动态24小时监测(NAMB)以重新评估血压。达到的等长运动血压与随访血压相关性良好(偶然收缩压r = 0.43,舒张压r = 0.45,NAMB收缩压r = 0.44,舒张压r = 0.58,P <.001)。然而,达到的动态血压与未来血压的关系较差(r范围为0.09至0.31,P =无显著性差异至P <.01)。由于运动前动脉内坐位血压也与随访血压相关性良好(r范围为0.33至0.48,P <.01至P <.001),且r值与达到的等长运动血压相近,我们使用多元回归(包括所有静息和运动血压值作为自变量)来评估基线值和运动值对随访血压预测的贡献。基线值解释了未来血压方差的12%至23%(从偶然舒张压到NAMB舒张压,收缩压值),而达到的等长运动血压额外解释了方差的1%至11%(从偶然收缩压到NAMB舒张压)。一般来说,应激源引起的血压从基线的变化与随访测量不相关。在高反应者组中,达到的动态血压与随访血压无显著相关性,而达到的等长运动舒张压与随访血压相关(偶然舒张压r = 0.56,P <.05,NAMB收缩压和舒张压r = 0.52,P <.05)。两组未来血压水平相似。总之,即使血压读数非常准确,动态运动的反应性仍是未来血压的弱预测指标,与静息血压值相比,并未改善预测。动脉内血压对等长运动的反应略微改善了未来血压水平