首页> 外文期刊>Journal of hypertension >Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus self-measurement of blood pressure at home: correlation with target organ damage.
【24h】

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus self-measurement of blood pressure at home: correlation with target organ damage.

机译:动态血压监测与在家中血压的自我测量:与靶器官损害的相关性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring and home blood pressure measurements predicted the presence of target organ damage and the risk of cardiovascular events better than did office blood pressure. METHODS: To compare these two methods in their correlation with organ damage, we consecutively included 325 treated (70%) or untreated hypertensives (125 women, mean age = 64.5 +/- 11.3) with office (three measurements at two consultations), home (three measurements morning and evening over 3 days) and 24-h ambulatory monitoring. Target organs were evaluated by ECG, echocardiography, carotid echography and detection of microalbuminuria. Data from 302 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean BP levels were 142/82 mmHg for office, 135.5/77 mmHg for home and 128/76 mmHg for 24-h monitoring (day = 130/78 mmHg; night = 118.5/67 mmHg). With a 135 mmHg cut-off, home and daytime blood pressure diverged in 20% of patients. Ambulatory and Home blood pressure were correlated with organ damage more closely than was office BP with a trend to better correlations with home BP. Using regression analysis, a 140 mmHg home systolic blood pressure corresponded to a 135 mmHg daytime systolic blood pressure; a 133 mmHg daytime ambulatory blood pressure and a 140 mmHg home blood pressure corresponded to the same organ damage cut-offs (Left ventricular mass index = 50 g/m, Cornell.QRS = 2440 mm/ms, carotid intima media thickness = 0.9 mm). Home-ambulatory differences were significantly associated with age and antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSION: We showed that home blood pressure was at least as well correlated with target organ damage, as was the ambulatory blood pressure. Home-ambulatory correlation and their correlation with organ damage argue in favor of different cut-offs, that are approximately 5 mmHg higher for systolic home blood pressure.
机译:目的:动态血压(BP)监测和家庭血压测量预测目标器官损伤的存在和心血管事件的风险要比办公室血压好。方法:为了比较这两种方法与器官损伤的相关性,我们连续纳入了325例经过治疗(70%)或未经治疗的高血压(125名妇女,平均年龄= 64.5 +/- 11.3),并在办公室(两次会诊进行了三项测量),家庭(3天早晨和晚上进行3次测量)和24小时动态监测。通过ECG,超声心动图,颈动脉回波描记术和微量白蛋白尿的检测评估靶器官。分析了来自302位患者的数据。结果:办公室的平均血压水平为142/82 mmHg,家庭为135.5 / 77 mmHg,24小时监测为128/76 mmHg(白天= 130/78 mmHg;晚上= 118.5 / 67 mmHg)。截止值为135 mmHg,20%的患者的家庭和白天血压差异较大。动态血压和家庭血压与器官损害的相关性高于办公室血压,并且与家庭血压的相关性更高。使用回归分析,140 mmHg的主动脉收缩压对应于135 mmHg的白天收缩压。 133 mmHg的日间动态血压和140 mmHg的家庭血压对应相同的器官损伤临界值(左心室质量指数= 50 g / m,康奈尔QRS = 2440 mm / ms,颈动脉内膜中层厚度= 0.9 mm )。家庭流动性差异与年龄和降压治疗显着相关。结论:我们显示,家庭血压和非门诊血压至少与目标器官损害相关。家庭门诊相关性及其与器官损害的相关性主张采用不同的临界值,对于心脏收缩期的家庭血压而言,该临界值高约5 mmHg。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号