高龄老年人血压变异性与踝臂指数关系探讨

目的评价高龄老年人群血压变异性(BPV)与踝臂指数(ABI)的关系。方法入选年龄≥80岁高龄老人111例,按照ABI分为异常ABI组(ABI≤0.9或ABI>1.3)56例和正常ABI组(ABI>0.9)55例,比较2组24h动态血压参数和BPV参数;另根据血压将患者分为高血压组48例和非高血压组63例,观察2组BPV及ABI差异。logistic回归分析ABI独立危险因素。结果异常ABI组较正常ABI组24h舒张压、昼间舒张压和夜间舒张压明显降低(P<0.05),24h收缩压变异性[(12.80±2.66)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa)vs(14.14±3.64)mm Hg]明显降低、夜间收缩压变异性[(11.99±4.19)mm Hg vs(9.97±4.05)mm Hg]明显增高(P<0.05)。高血压组24h收缩压变异性[(14.87±3.91)mm Hg vs(13.20±3.41)mm Hg]、夜间收缩压变异性[(12.27±5.50)mm Hg vs(10.33±3.93)mm Hg]明显增高,ABI[(0.98±0.21)vs(1.07±0.20)]明显降低(P<0.05)。logistic回归分析提示,夜间舒张压和夜间收缩压变异性为ABI的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。结论高龄老年人群24h舒张压、昼间及夜间舒张压、24h收缩压变异性、夜间收缩压变异性可能是异常ABI的危险因素。     

高龄老年高血压患者动态血压特点

目的探讨高龄老年高血压患者动态血压特点。方法选择我院心血管内科及老年医学科住院的高血压患者265例,按年龄分为高龄老年组(年龄≥80岁)94例、老年组(60～79岁)90例和60岁组81例,行动态血压监测,分析其血压节律、3个时段(24h、昼间及夜间)血压均值及血压变异性的特点。结果高龄老年组和老年组杓型血压发生率、24h舒张压、昼间舒张压、昼间平均压、夜间舒张压明显低于60岁组,反杓型血压发生率、24h脉压、昼间脉压、夜间收缩压、夜间脉压明显高于60岁组(P0.05,P0.01);高龄老年组杓型血压发生率及24h、昼间、夜间舒张压明显低于老年组[13.83%vs 26.66%,(66.17±7.39)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa)vs (70.39±10.96)mm Hg,(66.90±7.55)mm Hg vs (70.88±11.68)mm Hg,(64.10±8.14)mm Hg vs (68.27±11.86)mm Hg,P0.05,P0.01],24h、夜间脉压明显高于老年组(P0.05,P0.01),昼间收缩压变异明显高于老年组和60岁组,24h收缩压变异高于60岁组,差异有统计学意义(P0.01);老年组24h平均压明显低于60岁组(P0.05)。结论高龄老年高血压患者动态血压表现出血压节律异常、脉压增大、血压变异性升高等特点。     

老年住院患者衰弱指数与血压水平的关系

目的探讨老年住院患者衰弱指数的分布情况及其与血压水平的相关性。方法选择老年住院患者105例,依据衰弱指数评估量表分为衰弱组20例(0.45≤衰弱指数1)、衰弱前期组40例(0.20衰弱指数0.45)及非衰弱组45例(0衰弱指数≤0.20),同时收集人口学资料、24h平均收缩压、24h平均舒张压、昼间平均收缩压、昼间平均舒张压、夜间平均收缩压、夜间平均舒张压、降压药物数量及慢病情况。结果衰弱组24h平均收缩压明显低于非衰弱组和衰弱前期组[(115.95±12.26)mm Hg vs(124.74±12.96)mm Hg,(124.76±12.19)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa),P0.05],昼间平均收缩压明显低于非衰弱组[(116.63±12.08)mm Hg vs(126.10±14.17)mm Hg,P0.05]。衰弱前期组平均降压药物数量明显高于非衰弱组[(2.13±0.99)种vs(1.42±1.10)种,P0.05]。衰弱指数与年龄、降压药物数量、脑卒中、恶性肿瘤、关节炎、慢性肾脏病、共病数量呈正相关,与24h平均收缩压、24h平均舒张压、昼间平均收缩压、昼间平均舒张压、夜间平均收缩压呈负相关(P0.05,P0.01)。结论老年住院患者中,衰弱发生率随增龄而增加;衰弱患者应适当减少降压药物数量,避免血压过低。     

血压变异性对老年女性高血压患者颈动脉硬化的影响

目的探讨血压变异性对老年女性高血压患者颈动脉硬化的影响。方法选择198例诊室血压正常的女性高血压患者作为高血压组,同时选择女性正常血压者200例作为对照组。2组均行颈动脉超声检查,测颈动脉内膜中层厚度(IMT),测定24h动态血压和生化指标。结果高血压组冠心病(48.5%vs 39.5%)、脑血管病(51.0%vs 40.5%)和肾病(15.2%vs 8.5%)及颈动脉硬化(65.7%vs 26.0%)比例明显高于对照组(P<0.05,P<0.01),高血压组IMT明显高于对照组[(1.18±0.31)mmvs(0.81±0.24)mm,P=0.003]。高血压组夜间平均收缩压[(159.1±13.2)mm Hg)vs(141.3±11.3)mm Hg,1mm Hg=0.133kPa],夜间收缩压标准差[(15.9±3.1)mm Hg vs(9.5±1.2)mm Hg]及夜间收缩压血压负荷[(41.4±2.2)%vs(21.3±2.6)%]明显增高,夜间舒张压标准差[(9.1±4.1)mm Hg vs(6.2±2.3)mm Hg]及夜间舒张压血压负荷[(34.7±11.2)%vs(22.6±11.5)%]明显增高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05,P<0.01)。结论血压变异性增大,夜间血压增高及血压负荷的增加是女性颈动脉硬化的危险因素。     

90岁以上下肢动脉闭塞症患者血压和血糖特点分析

目的了解90岁以上下肢动脉闭塞症患者的临床特征以及他们在血压和血糖方面的特点。方法选择2014年1~12月在我院老年病房住院的90岁以上患者145例,根据彩色多普勒超声分为动脉闭塞组75例,非动脉闭塞组70例。2组行24h动态血压监测,比较24h平均收缩压、24h平均舒张压、24h平均脉压、昼间平均收缩压、昼间平均舒张压、夜间平均收缩压、夜间平均舒张压以及一般临床资料及血生化。结果动脉闭塞组高血压、超重或肥胖、体质量指数、服用降糖药物、降压药物比例明显高于非动脉闭塞组[88.0%vs 74.3%,48.0%vs30.0%,(24.0±3.6)kg/m2 vs(22.3±3.9)kg/m2,54.1%vs 28.0%,86.4%vs 69.2%,P0.05]。动脉闭塞组24h平均收缩压、昼间平均收缩压、24h平均脉压明显高于非动脉闭塞组[(133.5±15.7)mm Hg vs(127.5±14.1)mm Hg,(133.4±15.9)mm Hg vs(127.0±14.2)mm Hg,(69.5±14.4)mm Hg vs(63.7±10.6)mm Hg,1mm Hg=0.133kPa,P0.05,P0.01]。结论 90岁以上人群下肢动脉闭塞症发生率明显升高。建议90岁以上人群仍需要积极控制血压以及体质量指数。     

血压变异性与脑血管病住院患者脑小血管病关系的研究

目的研究血压变异性(blood pressure variability,BPV)与脑血管病患者脑小血管病(cerebral small vessel disease,CSVD)的相关性。方法收集我院神经内科住院的脑血管病患者341例,完成24h动态血压监测及头颅MRI扫描,获得血压变异标准差(SD)等BPV相关参数并根据MRI上CSVD严重程度进行总体评分,根据影像学上总体CSVD评分分为CSVD 0分组55例,CSVD 1分组117例,CSVD 2分组86例,CSVD 3分组49例,CSVD≥4分组34例。收集患者一般临床资料,采用logistic回归分析BPV参数是否为CSVD的独立危险因素。结果不同CSVD评分组性别、糖尿病、高脂血症、吸烟及体质量指数比较,无统计学差异(P0.05),而年龄、高血压比例比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.01);不同CSVD评分组夜间收缩压SD、夜间舒张压SD、夜间动脉压SD比较,无统计学差异(P0.05)。CSVD 0、1、2、3、≥4分组24h收缩压SD[(11.7±3.0)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa)vs (12.6±3.1)mm Hg vs(13.6±3.3)mm Hg vs(13.7±3.7)mm Hg vs(13.7±3.2)mm Hg]、昼间收缩压SD[(11.1±3.0)mm Hg vs(12.0±3.2)mm Hg vs(13.0±3.2)mm Hg vs(13.7±3.8)mm Hg vs(12.8±3.1)mm Hg]、24h舒张压SD[(8.4±1.9)mm Hg vs(9.0±2.3)mm Hg vs(9.1±2.2)mm Hg vs(9.7±2.4)mm Hg vs(9.1±2.8)mm Hg]、昼间舒张压SD[(7.9±1.8)mm Hg vs (8.5±2.5)mm Hg vs (8.6±2.3)mm Hg vs (9.4±2.2)mm Hg vs (8.6±3.2)mm Hg]、24h动脉压SD[(9.1±1.9)mm Hg vs (9.9±2.4)mm Hg vs (10.4±2.3)mm Hg vs (10.6±2.4)mm Hg vs(10.1±2.5)mm Hg]、昼间动脉压SD[(8.9±1.9)mm Hg vs (9.5±2.5)mm Hg vs (10.0±2.3)mm Hg vs (10.4±2.4)mm Hg vs (9.7±2.8)mm Hg]比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05,P0.01)。logistic回归分析显示,24h收缩压SD是CSVD的独立危险因素(P=0.032)。结论 24hBPV及昼间BPV与CSVD严重程度存在一定相关性。     

中国男性老老年高血压患者24h动态血压与脑小血管疾病的关系

目的探讨中国老老年原发性高血压患者24h动态血压与脑小血管疾病(SVD)的关系。方法选择原发性高血压患者106例,进行24h动态血压监测。SVD包括腔隙性脑梗死(LI)和脑白质病变(WML)。根据WML级别分为低级别WML组52例和高级别WML组54例。根据LI数目分为非LI组22例,单发LI组22例,多发LI组62例。根据血压类型分为杓型血压组10例,非杓型血压组96例。结果与低级别WML组比较,高级别WML组夜间收缩压、昼间舒张压、夜间舒张压、24h舒张压明显升高(P0.05,P0.01)。多发LI组夜间收缩压、夜间舒张压较非LI组和单发LI组明显升高[(135.5±13.5)mm Hg vs(125.6±9.0)mm Hg,(129.1±19.6)mm Hg,(67.0±8.7)mm Hg vs(61.8±5.8)mm Hg,(59.9±7.9)mm Hg,1mm Hg=0.133kPa,P0.05],夜间血压下降幅度较非LI组和单发LI组明显减小[(-3.8±6.9)%vs(3.1±6.5)%,(1.7±8.2)%,P0.01]。非杓型血压组多发LI发生率显著高于杓型血压组(62.5%vs 20.0%,P=0.024)。结论中国男性老老年原发性高血压患者异常的血压昼夜节律可能是SVD的一种危险因素。     

原发性高血压患者24小时动态血压变异性与缺血性脑白质病变的相关性研究

目的分析原发性高血压患者24h血压变异性与缺血性脑白质病变(white matter lesions,WML)的相关性。方法收集2017年1～6月北京大学人民医院接受诊治的原发性高血压患者126例,所有患者行24h动态血压监测和头颅MRI检查,根据Fazekas量表作为诊断WML程度的依据,分为无-轻度WML组42例和中-重度WML组84例。收集2组一般临床资料,对患者24h动态血压各时段(24h、昼间、夜间)收缩压、舒张压及收缩压、舒张压标准差和变异系数进行分析。结果中-重度WML组年龄明显高于无-轻度WML组[(66.02±11.11)岁vs(60.00±10.57)岁,P=0.000],HDL-C水平明显低于无-轻度WML组[(1.08±0.02)mmol/L vs (1.25±0.26)mmol/L,P=0.000]。中-重度WML组昼间收缩压、夜间收缩压、昼间收缩压标准差、昼间舒张压标准差、昼间收缩压变异系数和昼间舒张压变异系数明显高于无-轻度WML组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05,P0.01)。logistic回归分析显示,年龄、昼间收缩压标准差与WML严重程度呈正相关(OR=1.077,95%CI:1.025～1.133,P=0.012;OR=1.251,95%CI:1.014～1.543,P=0.005)。结论原发性高血压患者WML严重程度与昼间收缩压标准差、年龄密切相关。     

老年高血压患者抑郁焦虑情绪对血压变异性的影响

目的探讨老年高血压患者抑郁焦虑情绪发生率及抑郁焦虑情绪对血压和血压变异性的影响。方法对68例老年高血压患者和32例健康体检者进行抑郁自评量表（SDS）和焦虑自评量表（SAS）的心理问卷调查以及汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HAMD）和汉密尔顿焦虑量表（HAMA）的评定,根据量表评分结果将高血压组再分成有抑郁焦虑情绪组和无抑郁焦虑情绪组,所有研究对象均进行24h动态血压监测,并对结果进行分析。结果 （1）高血压患者抑郁情绪发生率（30/68）和焦虑情绪发生率（32/68）明显高于对照组的抑郁（7/32）和焦虑（8/32）情绪发生率（P〈0.05）;（2）高血压组的血压变异性参数：24h收缩压标准差（24hSSD）、24h舒张压标准差（24hDSD）、白天收缩压标准差（dSSD）、白天舒张压标准差（dDSD）、夜间收缩压标准差（nSSD）、夜间舒张压标准差（nDSD）均大于对照组（P〈0.01）,且收缩压变异性大于舒张压变异性;有抑郁焦虑情绪高血压组的24hSSD和dSSD高于无抑郁焦虑情绪组（P〈0.05）。结论高血压患者较对照组有更高的抑郁焦虑情绪发生率和更大的血压变异性;有抑郁焦虑情绪的高血压患者血压变异性明显高于无抑郁焦虑情绪的高血压患者。     

动脉粥样硬化性肾动脉狭窄患者24小时动态血压特征及靶器官损害相关研究

目的探讨动脉粥样硬化性肾动脉狭窄(ARAS)患者24 h动态血压、昼夜节律变化特征及靶器官损害。方法选择2014年1月~2018年12月在上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院高血压科连续住院的ARAS患者121例(ARAS组),另选择同期年龄、性别、体质量指数和高血压病程等匹配的原发性高血压(EH)患者418例(EH组),观察并比较2组诊室及24 h动态血压及靶器官损害的差异。结果与EH组比较,ARAS组诊室收缩压[(155±23)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133k Pa)vs(145±22)mm Hg,P<0.01]、诊室脉压[(75±20)mm Hg vs(65±18)mm Hg,P<0.01]、24h收缩压[(143±19)mm Hg vs(130±16)mm Hg,P<0.01]、昼间收缩压[(145±18)mm Hg vs(133±16)mm Hg,P<0.01]、夜间收缩压[(138±21)mm Hg vs(123±18)mm Hg,P<0.01]、夜间舒张压[(75±12)mm Hg vs(73±10)mm Hg,P<0.05]明显升高,差异有统计学意义。与EH组比较,ARAS组杓型血压比例明显降低,反杓型血压比例明显升高(P<0.05)。校正相关因素后,与EH组比较,ARAS组颈动脉内膜中层厚度、左心室质量指数及血浆N末端B型钠尿肽前体水平明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论ARAS患者收缩压及夜间血压较高,更多表现为反杓型血压。有独立于血压及肾功能水平更严重的靶器官损害。     

国产与进口奥美沙坦酯对轻中度原发性高血压患者降压疗效与安全性的比较

目的通过与进口奥美沙坦酯比较,评价国产奥美沙坦酯治疗轻中度原发性高血压患者的疗效和安全性。方法采用随机、双盲、双模拟、阳性对照、多中心临床试验方法。入选轻中度原发性高血压患者222例,按11比例随机分为试验组110例和对照组112例,分别接受国产或进口奥美沙坦酯20mg口服治疗。4周后如诊室坐位血压<140/90mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa)则维持原剂量;血压未达标者加量至国产奥美沙坦酯40mg+安慰剂2片,或进口奥美沙坦酯40mg+安慰剂2片,服药至8周末。在基线和第8周时分别进行24h动态血压监测,观察治疗前后血压变化。结果与基线比较,治疗4周后,试验组与对照组诊室坐位血压平均降幅分别为(20.24±13.13)/(15.03±6.79)mm Hg vs(18.66±10.41)/(14.24±5.90)mm Hg;8周后分别为(22.50±11.61)/(16.57±6.33)mm Hg vs(21.78±11.24)/(16.08±6.02)mm Hg,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗8周后,试验组与对照组24h血压平均降幅分别为(8.8±3.0)/(10.8±2.8)mm Hg vs(8.9±4.0)/(9.2±4.2)mm Hg,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论轻中度原发性高血压患者服用国产奥美沙坦酯治疗能有效、安全地降低血压,其降压幅度及平稳性与进口奥美沙坦酯相似。     

老年男性原发性高血压患者动态血压及血压变异性与踝臂指数的关系探讨

目的评价老年男性原发性高血压患者动态血压及血压变异性(BPV)与踝臂指数(ABI)的关系。方法入选老年男性原发性高血压患者160例,按照ABI分为正常ABI组(ABI>0.90)104例和低ABI组(ABI≤0.90)56例,比较并分析其24 h动态血压参数和BPV参数。结果低ABI组较正常ABI组24 h平均脉压[(62.4±13.8)mm Hg比(53.0±13.0)mm Hg]、日间平均脉压[(67.3±17.0)mm Hg比(55.4±20.0)mm Hg]和夜间平均脉压[(63.0±16.0)mm Hg比(52.9±13.6)mm Hg]均高(P<0.01),同时夜间收缩压最大值[(146.5±17.4)mm Hg比(135.5±17.1)mm Hg]、夜间收缩压标准差[(12.4±4.0)mm Hg比(10.1±4.2)mm Hg]均大(P<0.05)。结论老年男性原发性高血压患者夜间收缩压最大值、夜间收缩压标准差、日间平均脉压、夜间平均脉压和24 h平均脉压升高可能是低ABI的危险因素。     

原发性高血压患者血压变异性与早期肾损害

目的探讨血压变异性(BPV)和原发性高血压患者早期肾损害的关系。方法根据尿白蛋白与尿肌酐比值(UACR)把181例原发性高血压患者分为两组,UACR≤30mg/g为单纯高血压组(A组,120例),UACR>30mg/g为合并早期肾损害组(B组,61例),行24h动态血压监测,BPV以血压标准差和变异系数表示,用Pearson相关分析和多元线性回归分析比较两组患者BPV和早期肾损害之间的关系。结果两组患者各个时段的血压均值差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);除白昼收缩压变异性外,A组和B组24h收缩压变异性[标准差(13.6±3.0)比(15.3±4.1)mmHg;变异系数(0.11±0.02)比(0.12±0.03)]、24h舒张压变异性[标准差(9.6±2.6)比(11.8±4.2)mmHg;变异系数(0.13±0.04)比(0.15±0.05)]、白昼舒张压变异性[标准差(9.5±3.0)比(11.3±4.6)mmHg;变异系数(0.12±0.04)比(0.14±0.06)]、夜间收缩压变异性[标准差(10.0±3.9)比(13.2±4.7)mmHg;变异系数(0.08±0.03)比(0.11±0.04)]和夜间舒张压变异性[标准差(7.7±3.7)比(10.0±3.8)mmHg;变异系数(0.11±0.05)比(0.14±0.05)]差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。Pearson相关分析显示UACR与24h收缩压变异性、24h舒张压变异性、白昼舒张压变异性、夜间收缩压变异性及夜间舒张压变异性呈正相关(均P<0.01)。多元线性回归分析显示UACR与夜间收缩压变异性、24h舒张压变异性、夜间舒张压水平和三酰甘油呈正相关(均P<0.05)。结论原发性高血压患者夜间收缩压变异性、24h舒张压变异性、夜间舒张压水平和三酰甘油与早期肾损害相关。     

血压昼夜节律异常对不同亚型急性缺血性脑卒中影响的研究

目的探讨高血压患者血压昼夜节律异常对不同亚型急性缺血性脑卒中的影响。方法参照改良TOAST分型标准,将97例伴高血压的急性缺血性脑卒中患者分为动脉粥样硬化血栓形成(arterothrombosis,AT)组66例和小动脉病变(small artery disease,SAD)组31例,并进行24h动态血压监测。比较2组间24h、昼间和夜间的血压水平、晨峰血压及血压昼夜节律的变化。结果 AT组夜间收缩压明显高于SAD组[(133.86±18.17)mm Hg vs(124.42±16.06)mm Hg,1mm Hg=0.133kPa,P<0.05];AT组血压昼夜节律消失比例明显高于SAD组(84.8%vs 64.5%,P<0.05);2组晨峰血压发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(37.9%vs 19.4%,P>0.05)。结论血压昼夜节律消失和夜间血压水平升高与AT型缺血性脑卒中的发生有关。     

Efficacy and tolerability of initial high vs low doses of S‐(‐)‐amlodipine in hypertension

In an 8‐week randomized trial of patients with mild or moderate hypertension, the authors investigated the efficacy and tolerability of initial high (5.0 mg/d) vs low (2.5 mg/d) doses of S‐(‐)‐amlodipine (equivalent to 5 and 10 mg of racemic amlodipine, respectively). In the S‐(‐)‐amlodipine 2.5‐mg group (n=263), 24‐hour ambulatory systolic/diastolic blood pressure (±standard deviation) decreased from 131.5±15.0/82.1±10.7 mm Hg at baseline to 126.0±13.5/78.5±9.5 mm Hg at 8 weeks of follow‐up by a least square mean (±standard error) change of 6.0±0.6/3.8±0.4 mm Hg. In the S‐(‐)‐amlodipine 5‐mg group (n=260), the corresponding changes were from 133.6±13.7/83.1±9.9 mm Hg to 125.0±12.0/78.2±8.9 mm Hg by 8.1±0.6/4.7±0.4 mm Hg, respectively. The between‐group differences in changes in 24‐hour systolic/diastolic blood pressure were 2.1/0.9 (P=.02/.17) mm Hg. Similar trends were observed for daytime and nighttime ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. The incidence rate was similar for all adverse events. An initial high dose of S‐(‐)‐amlodipine improved ambulatory blood pressure control with similar tolerability as an initial low dose in hypertension.     

比较不同时间服用缬沙坦对高血压患者血压变异性的影响

目的比较不同时间服用缬沙坦及苯磺酸氨氯地平片对原发性高血压（高血压）患者血压变异性（bloodpressurevariability,BPV）的影响。方法采用随机数字法将120例轻一中度高血压患者分成3组,分别为日间口服缬沙坦组、夜间口服缬沙坦组、日间口服苯磺酸氨氯地平组,治疗前、后进行24h动态血压监测。以动态血压变异标准差作为血压变异性指标,比较3个月后3种治疗方案对血压及血压变异性的影响。结果3种治疗方案均能有效降低血压,与治疗前比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。在控制BPV方面,日间口服缬沙坦组的BPV改善不明显,与治疗前比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;与治疗前比较,夜间口服缬沙坦组[收缩压变异性：（11±3）mmHg眠（15±4）nlmHg（1mmHg=0．133kPa）,P〈0．05;舒张压变异性：（7±2）mmHgVS．（10±4）mmHg,P〈0．05]和苯磺酸氨氯地平组[收缩压变异性：（10±3）mmHgIJS．（16±3）mmHg,P〈0．05;舒张压变异性：（6±2）mmHgVS．（11±2）mmHg,P〈0．05]的24h动态血压变异性降低,差异有统计学意义;苯磺酸氨氯地平组在改善BPV方面仍优于夜间口服缬沙坦组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论与日间服药相比,夜间服用缬沙坦能更有效改善血压变异性。     

老年原发性高血压患者血压晨峰与左心室肥厚的关系

目的探讨老年原发性高血压患者血压晨峰与左心室肥厚的关系。方法选择老年原发性高血压患者80例,根据24 h动态血压监测分为2组:血压晨峰值≥55 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)为晨峰组,血压晨峰值<55mm Hg为非晨峰组,每组40例,均常规行超声心动图检查,计算左心室重量指数(LVMI)。结果晨峰组24h、昼间、夜间收缩压及血压晨峰均明显高于非晨峰组(P<0.05),晨峰组LVMI明显高于非晨峰组;左心室肥厚比例明显高于非晨峰组(P<0.05)。结论老年原发性高血压患者血压晨峰与左心室肥厚密切相关。     

Masked Hypertension and Atherogenesis: The Impact on Adiponectin and Resistin Plasma Levels

Recent evidence suggests that masked hypertension (MH) is a predictor of cardiovascular disease and that hypoadiponectinemia and hyperesistinemia may contribute to chronic inflammatory process, insulin resistance, endothelial dysfunction, and accelerated atherogenesis. The aim of this study was to examine the adiponectin and resistin plasma levels in patients with MH and compare the findings with those of healthy normotensive persons matched for age, sex, body mass index, and other risk factors. Overall, 130 (60 men and 70 women) healthy persons (mean age, 45±12 years) who had clinic blood pressure values <140/90 mm Hg were studied. The study population underwent 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). According to the ABPM recordings, 24 individuals (8 men and 16 women) had MH (daytime systolic blood pressure ≥135 mm Hg or daytime diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mm Hg; group A) and the remaining 106 participants (52 men and 54 women) had normal ABPM findings (group B). Adiponectin and resistin plasma levels were determined in both groups by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay. Significantly higher (P<.01) resistin levels (12±4 vs 6.8±3.6 ng/mL) were found in group A compared with group B, while the adiponectin plasma levels were significantly lower (P<.01) in group A compared with group B (6±2.3 vs 11±2.7 μg/mL). Findings suggest that patients with MH have lower adiponectin levels and higher resistin levels compared with normotensive individuals. This observation may have prognostic significance for future cardiovascular events in patients with MH.     

Little Effect of Ordinary Antihypertensive Therapy on Nocturnal High Blood Pressure in Patients with Sleep Disordered Breathing

The antihypertensive effects of four different antihypertensive medications (β-blocking agent, atenolol 50 mg; calcium-antagonist, isradipine SRO [slow release] 2.5 mg; diuretic, hydrochlorothiazide [HCTZ] 25 mg; and angiotension converting enzyme-inhibitor, spirapril 6 mg) on obese patients with sleep disordered breathing and hypertension were compared by the ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM).Eighteen patients were randomized in a double-blind, crossover fashion to receive each of the four different medications for 8 weeks. ABPM was performed at baseline and after an 8-week treatment with these medications. A 2- to 3-week washout period occurred both at baseline and between each of the four medications. Three patients were omitted from statistical analysis because of technical problems of ABPM.Atenolol, isradipine SRO, and spirapril decreased significantly (P < .01) the mean 24-h systolic blood pressure, whereas HCTZ did not. The mean 24-h diastolic blood pressure decreased significantly after all four medications: 12 (SD ± 14) mm Hg with atenolol, 7 (SD ± 10) mm Hg with isradipine SRO, 3 mm Hg (SD ± 14) with HCTZ, and 6 (SD ± 15) mm Hg with spirapril (P < .01). During nighttime none of the medications reduced the mean diastolic or systolic blood pressure significantly. According to the 24-h blood pressure curve the influence of these four medications during the whole measurement period was not similar. Atenolol and spirapril lost their antihypertensive effect during the early morning hours. The antihypertensive effect of HCTZ varied markedly from hour to hour. The trough-to-peak ratio of no medication was >0.50.Negative correlation was observed between the apnea time and the mean systolic 24-h (r = −0.604, P = NS) and the mean systolic nocturnal blood pressure change (r = −0.590, P = NS).Our study revealed that the daytime high blood pressure was quite easily controlled by the ordinary monotherapy in these patients with partial upper airway obstruction and hypertension. Instead none of the medications used decreased nocturnal high blood pressure markedly.