Suppr超能文献

评估心肌梗死后患者的压力反射敏感性:频谱分析技术与去氧肾上腺素技术的比较

Assessing baroreflex sensitivity in post-myocardial infarction patients: comparison of spectral and phenylephrine techniques.

作者信息

Maestri R, Pinna G D, Mortara A, La Rovere M T, Tavazzi L

机构信息

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Institute of Care and Scientific Research, Rehabilitation Institute of Montescano, Pavia, Italy.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998 Feb;31(2):344-51. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00499-3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare, in post-myocardial infarction patients, baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) measured by the phenylephrine method (Phe-BRS) with that estimated by the Robbe (Robbe-BRS) and Pagani (alpha-low frequency [LF] and alpha-high frequency [HF]) spectral techniques.

BACKGROUND

BRS assessed by Phe-BRS has been shown to be of prognostic value in patients with a previous myocardial infarction, but the need for drug injection limits the use of this technique. Several noninvasive methods based on spectral analysis of systolic arterial pressure and heart period have been proposed, but their agreement with Phe-BRS has never been investigated in post-myocardial infarction patients.

METHODS

The linear association and the agreement between each spectral measurement and Phe-BRS were assessed by correlation analysis and by computing the relative bias and the limits of agreement in 51 post-myocardial infarction patients.

RESULTS

The correlation with Phe-BRS was r = 0.63 for Robbe-BRS, r = 0.62 for alpha-LF and r = 0.59 for alpha-HF. The relative bias was significant for alpha-LF (2.6 ms/mm Hg, p < 0.001) and alpha-HF (2.5 ms/mm Hg, p = 0.01) and not significant (-0.6 ms/mm Hg, p = 0.3) for Robbe-BRS. The normalized limits of agreement ranged from -98% to 95% for Robbe-BRS, from -67% to 126% for alpha-LF and from -108% to 143% for alpha-HF. When patients were classified according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, cutoff value 40%), the relative bias was higher in patients with a depressed LVEF, although statistical significance was high only for Robbe-BRS and was borderline for alpha-LF. The limits of agreement were similar in both groups of patients (p > 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a substantial linear association, the agreement between spectral measurements and Phe-BRS in post-myocardial infarction patients is weak because the difference can be as large as the BRS value being estimated. Phe-BRS is the measurement most associated with hemodynamic impairment. Because several factors within each method contribute to the overall difference, neither method can be defined as being better than the other in estimating baroreflex gain, nor can one be used as an alternative to the other. Ad hoc studies are needed to assess which method provides the most useful physiologic or pathophysiologic information or the most accurate prediction of prognosis.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较心肌梗死后患者中,通过去氧肾上腺素法测量的压力反射敏感性(Phe-BRS)与通过罗布(Robbe-BRS)及帕加尼(α-低频[LF]和α-高频[HF])频谱技术估算的压力反射敏感性。

背景

通过Phe-BRS评估的压力反射敏感性已被证明对既往心肌梗死患者具有预后价值,但药物注射的需求限制了该技术的应用。已提出了几种基于收缩期动脉压和心动周期频谱分析的非侵入性方法,但它们与Phe-BRS的一致性从未在心肌梗死后患者中进行过研究。

方法

通过相关性分析以及计算51例心肌梗死后患者的相对偏差和一致性界限,评估每种频谱测量与Phe-BRS之间的线性关联和一致性。

结果

Robbe-BRS与Phe-BRS的相关性为r = 0.63,α-LF为r = 0.62,α-HF为r = 0.59。α-LF(2.6 ms/mm Hg,p < 0.001)和α-HF(2.5 ms/mm Hg,p = 0.01)的相对偏差具有统计学意义,而Robbe-BRS的相对偏差无统计学意义(-0.6 ms/mm Hg,p = 0.3)。Robbe-BRS的标准化一致性界限范围为-98%至95%,α-LF为-67%至126%,α-HF为-108%至143%。当根据左心室射血分数(LVEF,临界值40%)对患者进行分类时,LVEF降低的患者相对偏差更高,尽管仅Robbe-BRS具有较高的统计学意义,α-LF接近临界值。两组患者的一致性界限相似(p > 0.3)。

结论

尽管存在显著的线性关联,但心肌梗死后患者中频谱测量与Phe-BRS之间的一致性较弱,因为差异可能与所估算的压力反射敏感性值一样大。Phe-BRS是与血流动力学损害最相关的测量方法。由于每种方法中的几个因素导致了总体差异,在估算压力反射增益方面,无法定义哪种方法优于另一种方法,也不能用一种方法替代另一种方法。需要进行专门研究以评估哪种方法能提供最有用的生理或病理生理信息或最准确的预后预测。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验