...
首页> 外文期刊>Acta ophthalmologica >Heterogeneity in arterial hypertension and ocular perfusion pressure definitions: Towards a consensus on blood pressure‐related parameters for glaucoma studies
【24h】

Heterogeneity in arterial hypertension and ocular perfusion pressure definitions: Towards a consensus on blood pressure‐related parameters for glaucoma studies

机译:动脉高血压和眼灌注压力定义中的异质性:朝向青光眼研究的血压相关参数共识

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Abstract Purpose Glaucoma studies have long taken into account the blood pressure ( BP ) status of patients. This study summarizes and evaluates the impact of the different criteria that have been used for BP ‐related variables in glaucoma research. Methods Studies included in two meta‐analyses that reviewed the role of BP in glaucoma were analyzed. Additional studies published after the search periods of the meta‐analyses were also included. Criteria for the definition of arterial hypertension and other BP ‐related variables, such as mean arterial pressure ( MAP ) and mean ocular perfusion pressure ( MOPP ), were retrieved. Results Sixty‐four studies were evaluated. One‐third used 140?mmHg as a systolic BP cut‐off to define hypertension, 20% used 160?mmHg and the remaining half used various other criteria. Less than 20% of studies reported MAP and/or MOPP . While eight of the ten studies reporting MAP used a correct formula that only happened for five of the eleven studies reporting MOPP . Using as an example average blood pressure values, incorrectly used formulas could have led to an overestimation of more than 100% of the expected values. Conclusion Considerable heterogeneity exists in BP ‐related variables in glaucoma research and different definitions can lead to large disparities. Glaucoma research would benefit from a consensus regarding blood pressure parameters.
机译:摘要目的青光眼研究已经考虑了患者的血压(BP)状态。本研究总结和评估了已用于BP-相关变量在青光眼研究中的不同标准的影响。方法分析了两种审查BP在青光眼中的作用的2个荟萃分析中的研究。还包括在荟萃分析的搜索期后发布的其他研究。检测出检索动脉高血压定义的标准和其他BP-相关变量,例如平均动脉压(MAP)和平均眼灌注压力(MOPP)。结果评估了六十四项研究。三分之一使用140?MMHG作为收缩性BP切断以定义高血压,20%使用的160毫米?MMHG和剩余的一半使用各种其他标准。少于20%的研究报告了地图和/或MOPP。虽然十个研究报告地图中的八次使用正确的公式,但只发生在报告MOPP的十一研究中的五个研究中。用作示例性平均血压值,错误使用的公式可能导致超过100%的预期值的高估。结论青光眼研究的BP-相关变量存在相当大的异质性,不同的定义可能导致大的差异。青光眼研究将从关于血压参数的共识中受益。

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