两种体位对不同血压计血压测量值的影响

目的探讨坐位与卧位对电子血压计和汞柱血压计测量值差异的影响,以便在临床工作中正确使用电子血压计及指导患者正确地使用电子血压计进行自测血压。方法对142例查体患者在坐位和卧位时由2名护士分别使用电子血压计和汞柱血压计测量左、右臂的收缩压和舒张压,比较两种血压计血压测量值的差异。结果坐位时电子血压计和汞柱血压计所测得的左臂收缩压、左臂舒张压、右臂收缩压、右臂舒张压差异无统计学意义（t=-0．315,1．560,-1．472,1．156,P〉0．05）。卧位时电子血压计和汞柱血压计所测得的左臂收缩压差异无统计学意义（t=-0．370,P〉0．05）,但卧位时左臂舒张压、右臂收缩压、右臂舒张压差异有统计学意义（t=5．172,-5．402,2．979,P〈0．05）。结论坐位测量血压时,电子血压计可以替代汞柱血压计。     

ICU患者心电监护与血压计监测血压的差异性研究

目的通过对ICU患者应用床边监护仪与汞柱血压仪监测血压的对比观察,探讨两种测量方法的差别。方法用多参数床边监护仪和汞柱式血压计分别对本组100例患者同时进行两种方法测量,记录分析每次测得收缩压和舒张压的数值。结果两种方法测得收缩压、舒张压值比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论多参数监护仪监测血压与汞柱式血压计监测血压值差异无统计学意义,具有较好的一致性,可靠性。     

保鲜袋作为一次性血压计袖带套在血压监测中的应用

目的探讨采用保鲜袋作为血压计袖带套监测血压对血压测量值的影响。方法选取100例患者分别2d采用保鲜袋作为血压计袖带套测量血压并同时使用传统血压计袖带测量血压,采用自身对照法测量血压共400次,比较两种方法测得血压值结果。结果第1种方法先采用保鲜袋作为血压计袖带套测量100例患者血压收缩压、舒张压值分别为（120．92±19．35）,（72．12±15．10）mmHg与后使用传统血压计袖带测量血压收缩压、舒张压值（121．50±18．00）,（70．37±14．00）mmHg比较,差异均无统计学意义（t分别为0．73,0．32;P〉0．05）;第2种方法先用传统方法测量血压100例患者血压收缩压、舒张压值分别为（122．044-15．21）,（74．52±9．96）mmHg与后使用保鲜袋作为血压计袖带套垫测量血压收缩压、舒张压值（122．06±15．26）,（73．86±10．37）mmHg比较,差异均无统计学意义（t分别为0．03,0．06;P〉0．05）。结论采用保鲜袋作为一次性血压计袖带套监测血压,操作简便,符合感染管理要求,不影响血压数值的准确性。     

两种无创血压测量仪测量值相关性研究

目的探讨两种无创血压测量仪血压测量结果的相关性。方法对52例病人在同一时间内进行汞柱式血压计、多参数监护仪两种无创血压、脉率及操作时间的监测。结果经配对t检验，两种无创血压测量仪测量的收缩压、舒张压均值、脉率，差异无统计学意义（P均〉0．5）；经相关性分析，汞柱式与监护仪其收缩压、舒张压及脉率相关系数均大于0．8，提示汞柱式与监护仪相关性好。测量时间监护仪较汞柱式每人次操作时间减少，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论监护仪所测的血压值完全可以代替汞柱式血压计所测血压值，抢救病人时为了节约抢救时间可直接用监护仪测量。     

透析中应用电子血压计监测血压的可行性分析

目的探讨在血液透析过程中应用电子血压计替代立式汞柱式血压计为血液透析病人测量血压的可行性。方法选择维持性血液透析患者86例,透析过程中采用立式汞柱式血压计和欧姆龙HEM-907型电子血压计同步使用袖带法测量无内瘘侧肱动脉压,每个病人重复测量3～4次,用Bland—Ahman分析法评价两种方法的差别情况。根据美国ANSI／AAMISP10-2002（手动、电子或自动血压计》规定的标准,如果电子血压计与立式汞柱式血压计测得的血压差值的均值在4-5mmHg以内,血压差值的标准差在±8mmHg以内,则电子血压计的误差在可接受范围内。结果电子血压计与立式汞柱血压计测量的收缩压差值为（-1．61±5．48）mmHg,两种方法测得舒张压差值为（-2．68±5．02）minHg（P〉0．05）。结论欧姆龙HEM-907电子血压计测量血压可靠,可以替代立式汞柱式血压计听诊法,从而减轻血透室护士工作量。     

生命体征监测仪与汞柱式血压计在临床应用中的对照观察

目的比较生命体征监测仪无创血压（NIBP）测量的准确性和重复性以及与汞柱式血压计测得的血压数值是否存在差异。方法随机抽取住院患者526例,分别用生命体征监测仪重复测量血压2次,再用汞柱式血压计测量血压1次,获取3组数据,计算生命体征监测仪前后2次NIBP测量和两种血压计测定数据的差异性。结果生命体征监测仪测量收缩压为（126．41±23．70）mmHg,舒张压为（75．51±12．95）mmHg,2次重复测定数值差异无统计学意义,与汞柱式血压计测量数据差异有统计学意义。结论使用生命体征监测仪测量NIBP可靠、简便和快捷,但不宜在同一时段与汞柱式血压计交替使用于同一观察对象。     

CH-308型半自动数字臂式血压计的准确性评价

评价CH-308型半自动数字臂式血压计(以下简称CH-308)测量血压的准确性。以2004年护校实习生95例为被测量对象,每位受试对象分别接受汞柱血压计与CH-308测量。CH-308与汞柱血压计所测得的收缩压值和两组舒张压值的频数分布均符合正态性分布;汞柱血压计所测得收缩压值为(98.44±7.59)mmHg,舒张压值为(67.22±6.72)mmHg,CH-308所测得收缩压值为(103.36±6.93)mmHg,舒张压值为(62.73±7.42)mmHg,两种方法所得收缩压值间比较:t=7.12,P<0.01;舒张压值间比较t=5.93,P<0.01,均有统计学差异;两组收缩压值之间的相关系数r=0.617,P<0.01,其回归方程为(方程式中的“x”是汞柱血压计所测得值,“y”是CH-308所测得值):y=0.526x+51.58,两组舒张压值之间的相关系数r=0.489,P<0.01,其回归方程为(方程式中的“x”是汞柱血压计所测得值,“y”是CH-308所测得值):y=0.517x+38.05;CH-308与汞柱血压计实际测得收缩压值差≤5mmHg占46%,≤10mmHg占76%,≤15mmHg占92%;实际测得舒张压值差≤5mmHg占53%,≤10mmHg占81%,≤15mmHg占93%。CH-308在反映血压动态变化趋势方面与汞柱血压计是一致的,但两者测量值不能简单等同;CH-308与汞柱血压计所测量的收缩压差值和舒张压差值均达到英国BHS标准中的C级标准,说明CH-308测量血压是准确可靠的。     

多功能监护仪与汞柱式血压计血压测量的差异性研究

目的：比较多功能监护仪与汞柱式血压计血压测量值的差异,为临床护理工作提供依据。方法使用多功能监护仪和汞柱式血压计同时测量血压,分别记录血压值。结果监护仪测量的收缩压均值、舒张压均值、脉压差均高于汞柱式血压计的测量值。监护仪与汞柱式血压计的血压测量值存在正相关性。结论多功能监护仪与汞柱式血压计血压测量值存在差异,但两者具有正相关性。     

电子血压计和汞柱式血压计测量血压的差异性分析

目的比较电子血压计和汞柱式血压计测量血压值的差异。方法选择87例患者于8：00和16：00交替应用汞柱式血压计（台式）和欧姆龙电子血压计测量血压，比较两种血压计血压测量值的差异。结果电子血压计和汞柱式血压计所测量血压值比较，无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论在同等条件下，使用电子血压计和汞柱式血压计不影响血压测量值，临床上应用可以互换，且电子血压计利于家庭自测血压，应用前景良好。     

三种常用血压计在精神科病房血压监测中的结果比较

目的探讨在精神科病房使用电子血压计代替汞柱血压计测量血压的可行性。方法选择精神科病房70例患者,在同一时间、同一部位、同一体位,分别使用台式汞柱式血压计、台式电子血压计、袖带式电子血压计进行血压测量,通过自身对照研究法,对其结果进行比较和分析。结果二种电子血压计与汞柱血压计比较,所测收缩压的数值明显偏高,提示差异有统计学意义(P0.01),而舒张压差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。二种电子血压计比较,无论收缩压还是舒张压,均无统计学差异(P0.05)。结论高血压的诊断标准是依据水银柱式血压计而定的。电子式血压计作为筛查工具省时省力,但在抢救危重患者、诊断高血压、指导高血压患者用药时应谨慎使用,当发现高值或低值血压,有必要用汞柱式血压计再进行重复测量,以防诊断错误。     

高血压合并慢性肾脏病患者的动态血压分析

目的 探讨原发性高血压合并慢性肾功能不全后动态血压的变化特点.方法 对28例单纯原发性高血压患者(A组)和25例合并慢性肾脏功能不全的高血压患者(B组)进行动态血压监测.结果 ①血压比较:24 h舒张压B组高于A组[(80.9±13.4)mm Hg比(70.3±15.6)mm Hg,P＜0.05)];B组夜间的收缩压与舒张压均高于A组[(160.2±17.8)mm Hg比(140.3±25.9)mm Hg和(82.6±16.1)姗Hg比(68.8±20.2)mm Hg,P＜0.01].②血压变异性比较:B组24 h收缩压变异性和舒张压变异性均高于A组[(13.5±3.9)mm Hg比(11.3±2.1)mm Hg和(9.2±1.2)mm Hg比(8.3±1.8)mm Hg,P＜0.05],B组夜间的收缩压与舒张压变异性均高于A组[(14.9±3.3)mm Hg比(9.3±2.1)mm Hg和(9.7±2.4)mm Hg比(8.0±2.2)mm Hg,P＜0.01)].③血压趋势比较:A组血压趋势以非勺型为多,占64.3%(18/28),反勺型占10.7%(3/28);而B组反勺型占48.0%(12/25),非勺型占40.0%(10/25).结论 肾性因素参与的高血压患者血压趋势紊乱,夜间血压及变异性明显增加,均可成为肾功能继续恶化和心脑血管事件发生的重要因素.     

肺移植术后早期心脏结构和功能的变化

目的 分析肺移植术后早期心脏结构和功能变化,探讨其与患者术后肺动脉压力降低之间的关系。方法 回顾性分析2002-2010年无锡市人民医院行肺移植手术90例,术前及术后超声心动图资料完整者20例患者的临床资料。对比分析术前及术后超声心动图的变化。应用Pearson直线相关分析判断术后早期心脏结构及功能的变化与肺动脉收缩期压力下降之间的关系。结果 术后肺动脉收缩期压力[(38.30±8.92)mmHg]较术前[(60.05±29.10)mm Hg]明显降低(t=3.120,P=0.006);术后右心室内径较术前明显缩小(t =36.000,P=0.008);三尖瓣及肺动脉瓣返流程度明显减轻(t=57.000、t=66.000,P均＜0.05)。术后左心房内径、左心室舒张末期内径[(35.15±5.73) mm和(43.25±5.56)mm]均较术前[(32.40±7.29)mm和(40.15±6.20) mm]明显扩大(t=-2.384和t=-2.153,P均＜0.05)。虽然术后每搏输出量[(59.54±14.97) ml)]较术前[(44.18±15.85) ml]明显增加(t=-3.918,P=0.004),但术后左心室射血分数(63.10±8.48)％较术前(71.75±8.10)％明显下降(t =3.742,P=0.001)。Pearson直线相关分析可见肺移植术后肺动脉收缩压降低程度越大,术后左心房内径、左心室舒张末期内径增加幅度及术后左心室射血分数降低幅度越大(相关系数分别为0.642、0.737、0.448,P均＜0.05)。结论 肺移植术后早期右心结构正常化,右心功能改善,左心扩大,心搏出量增加,但左心室收缩功能降低,这些变化与肺动脉收缩期压力降低有一定关系。     

Blood pressure monitoring with home monitors versus mercury sphygmomanometer

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of three automatic monitors (arm, wrist, finger) for blood pressure measurement manufactured by Omron compared with a standard mercury sphygmomanometer. PRIMRY END POINT: Difference in the mean blood pressure readings from each monitor; the secondary end point was difference in pulse readings. DESIGN: A single-visit, crossover trial tested each device twice on the left arm of each participant; the average of the two readings was recorded. The pulse readings from each monitor were also recorded. ANOVA was used to compare mean blood pressure readings and pulse readings from each device. RESULTS: A total of 55 persons (mean age 53 y; 36 women) met inclusion criteria and completed the study. The mean systolic and diastolic readings obtained from the electronic arm unit were comparable to the mercury readings (124.4/78.02 vs. 129.45/77.87 mm Hg, respectively; p > 0.05 for both readings). The mean results obtained from the wrist and finger monitors differed significantly from those of the mercury readings (145.44/89.58 and 113.94/69.07 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.05 for both monitors compared with control). No difference was measured in the mean pulse readings between the comparisons (p = 0.72). The absolute difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings from control varied the least wih the arm monitor. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the mercury sphygmomanometer, the arm monitor was the most accurate in measuring blood pressure. The wrist and finger monitors resulted in statistically significant mean systolic and diastolic differences compared with the mercury sphygmomanometer.     

Assessment of blood pressure discrepancies in third-trimester hypertensive gravidas

Previous studies have associated hypertension with discrepancies between right arm and left arm blood pressure (BP) measurements. The purpose of this study was to determine if there were clinically (defined as > or = 10 mm Hg disparity) and statistically significant differences between right arm and left arm BP measurements (systolic, diastolic, or mean) in 34 third-trimester hypertensive gravidas. Thirty-four third-trimester normotensive gravidas were used as controls. No subjects were in active labor. This study used a cross-sectional, 2-group design with convenience sampling. The protocol for BP measurement followed guidelines of the American Heart Association and the instrument manufacturer. The results showed a greater range in BP differences between arms for the hypertensive group in the systolic (0.67-26.67 mm Hg) and mean (0.25-67 mm Hg) pressures compared with the normotensive group (systolic, 0-14.33 mm Hg; mean, 0-12 mm Hg). The mean difference in BP between arms was greater for the hypertensive group compared with the normotensive group. Using a 1-tailed t test, the mean difference was statistically significant (P < or = .05) for the systolic pressure (P = .027) and for the mean pressure (P = .022), but not the diastolic pressure (P = .168). The frequency of clinically significant differences (> or = 10 mm Hg) was greater for the hypertensive group than for the normotensive group (13 vs 4). These differences in frequencies were not statistically significant with chi-square analysis (systolic, P = .074; diastolic, P = .303; mean, P = .303). These findings indicated BP discrepancies between arms exist in both normotensive and hypertensive gravidas, with a greater range and frequency of differences in the hypertensive group. This study supports the American Heart Association's recommendation of bilateral BP assessment.     

血压变异性与慢性房颤血栓前状态的关系

目的探讨血压变异性与慢性房颤患者血栓前状态之间的相关性。方法入选对象分为房颤组（NHYA分级心功能正常的慢性房颤46例）和对照组（其他窦性心律患者51例）。对比两组之间24h平均收缩压变异性（24hSSD）和24h平均舒张压变异性（24hDSD）,以及血浆血管性假血友病因子（vWF）、血小板α颗粒膜蛋白-140（GMP-140）、纤维蛋白原和D-二聚体等血栓前状态指标的差异,并对各组血压变异性与血栓前状态的指标进行相关性分析。结果1．房颤组24hSSD和24hDSD均显著高于对照组。2-房颤组vWF和GMP-140均显著高于对照组。两组纤维蛋白原、D-二聚体无显著差异。3．房颤组24hSSD与vWF呈显著正相关（r=0．416,P〈0．05）,与GMP-140无显著相关性;24hDSD与vWF和GMP-140均呈显著正相关（r=0．432,P〈0．05和r=0．378,P〈0．05）;24hSSD、24hDSD与纤维蛋白原或D-二聚体均无显著相关性。4．对照组24hSSD和24hDSD与vWF、GMP-140、纤维蛋白原或D-二聚体均无显著相关性（P〉0．05）。结论血压变异增大的慢性房颤患者血管内皮损害和血小板激活更显著,提示房颤发生血栓性并发症的危险性可能随血压变异性的增大而增加。     

Effect of losartan therapy on endothelial function in hypertensive patients

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of losartan therapy on endothelial function by measuring serum nitric oxide (NO) levels and urinary excretion of NO in patients with essential hypertension. A group of 30 untreated stage 2 hypertensive patients (15 males and 15 females; age, 51.3 +/- 1.5 years) were included in the study. Office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) was measured by using a mercury sphygmomanometer according to phase I and V of Korotkoff sounds. NO levels in serum and 24-hour urine were determined at baseline and after 6 weeks of daily dosing with losartan (50-100 mg). Losartan therapy resulted in a significant fall in systolic/diastolic BP (from 169.7 +/- 4.1/105 +/- 1.8 mm Hg at baseline to 146 +/- 2.7/91 +/- 1.9 mm Hg at the end of losartan treatment; P < 0.001). The therapy also caused significant increases in both serum NO level (32.74 +/- 3.01 microM/L at baseline versus 79.04 +/- 5.17 microM/L; P < 0.001 after therapy) and urinary NO excretion (58.21 +/- 3.72 microM/L at baseline versus 113.21 +/- 8.63 microM/L; P < 0.001 after therapy). Losartan therapy also reduced serum malondialdehyde (MDA), which is a measure of oxidative stress, by 0.201 nM (15.3%; P = 0.009). Losartan at a dose of 50 to 100 mg per day was effective in reducing elevated BP. The increase in serum NO levels and urinary NO excretion and a decrease in serum MDA levels by losartan treatment indicate a reduction in oxidative stress and enhances NO availability, both of which improve endothelial function. Thus, losartan therapy improves endothelial function in hypertensive patients with essential hypertension.     

Effect of losartan plus hydrochlorothiazide on nitric oxide status in 'nondipper' hypertensive patients

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of losartan (100 mg) plus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ; 25 mg) on nitric oxide (NO) production and blood pressure (BP) in "nondipper" severe hypertensive patients. Twelve hypertensive "nondipper patients" (6 of each gender) with sitting systolic/diastolic BP of 188.0 +/- 5.2/116.2 +/- 1.2 mm Hg were studied by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) after daily administration of 100 mg losartan plus 25 mg HCTZ for a period of 12 weeks. Office and mean 24-hour, as well as mean awake- and sleep-time systolic/diastolic BP, serum NO levels, and urinary excretion of NO were measured after the placebo period (3 weeks) and after 12 weeks of therapy. At the end of the 12-week treatment period, the mean 24-hour systolic/diastolic BP decreased significantly from 158.6 +/- 4.7/102.2 +/- 2.6 mm Hg (placebo period) to 140.3 +/- 4.8/90.9 +/- 3.3 mm Hg (P = 0.001/< or = 0.002). The mean BP (systolic/diastolic) during the waking period was reduced from 159.3 +/- 4.4/103.0 +/- 2.5 mm Hg to 135.0 +/- 4.4/88.2 +/- 3.1 (P < or = 0.007/P < or = 0.002), whereas the mean BP (systolic/diastolic) during the sleeping hours changed from 154.9 +/- 5.3/98.9 +/- 3.1 to 140.9 +/- 4.6 (P = 0.035)/91.7 +/- 3.2 mm Hg (P = 0.035/P = 0.051). Serum NO levels increased from 40.89 +/- 5.69 microM/L (placebo period) to 67.35 +/- 6.96 microM/L (posttreatment; P < or = 0.007), whereas the 24-hour urinary NO excretion did not change significantly (69.71 +/- 3.68 microM/L [placebo period] vs 79.64 +/- 4.25 microM/L [posttreatment]; P < or = 0.16). Urinary clearance of NO also did not change. Serum NO levels increased significantly without a significant change in urinary NO excretion. BP was significantly reduced but without modifying the nondipper pattern in these patients.     

急性脑梗死患者脉压参数的差异比较

背景:认识血压的不同成分对脑血管病的影响及在疾病不同情况下正确使用降压治疗均具有重要意义。目的:通过对急性脑梗死患者的入院脉压分析,探讨脉压增大与脑梗死的发生、严重程度的相关性。设计:病例-对照分析。单位:哈尔滨医科大学附属第一医院。对象:病例组为2002-06/2003-01因缺血性脑梗死入住哈尔滨医科大学附属第一医院的患者300例,男196例,女104例鸦年龄(57.9±11.9)岁。正常组为在同期来本院进行体检者199例,男110例,女89例鸦年龄(55.9±12.4)岁。方法:①血压测量:安静状态下应用水银柱血压计按标准方法选择右上肢肱动脉处测血压。记录患者的收缩压和舒张压,并计算脉压。②神经功能缺损评分:应用美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表在入院时对每例缺血性脑梗死患者进行临床神经功能缺损评分,以入院时评分作为脑卒中严重程度的评价指标,分值越大,脑卒中程度越重。主要观察指标:①两组对象血压各参数比较。②两组对象中不同脉压水平人员分布情况。③两组中不同年龄段人群脉压比较。④不同脉压水平脑梗死患者神经功能缺失评分非参数检验结果。结果:①平均收缩压:病例组明显高于对照组眼(152±22),(133±19)mmHg,t’=10.494,P<0.01演。平均舒张压:病例组明显高于对照组眼(93±14),(81±11)mmHg,t’=10.129,P<0.01演。平均脉压:病例组脉压高于对照组眼(59.61±11.86),(51.93±14.10)mmHg,t’=5.612,P<0.05演。两两相关分析结果显示,脉压与收缩压的Pearson相关系数为0.789(P<0.01),脉压与舒张压的Pearson相关系数为0.169(P<0.01),故可以认为脉压与收缩压的相关性更密切。②在病例组,脉压最大的分布区域在60～69mmHg,占27.7%;对照组脉压最大的分布区域在40～49mmHg,占35.7%。提示脑梗死时脉压大于60mmHg的发生率较高。③随着年龄的增加,脉压增大。40～69岁病例组的脉压水平明显高于同年龄对照组眼(54±16),(45±9)mmHg,t=4.86,P=0.000演。④不同脉压水平脑梗死患者进行入院神经功能缺失评分的非参数检验,结果为Kruskal-Wallis检验统计量如下:χ2=4.779,P=0.572>0.05;中位数检验的检验统计量如下:χ2=8.365,P=0.213>0.05。两种非参数检验结果提示入院评分差异无显著性,也就是说脑梗死时虽然脉压明显升高,但脉压增高的程度与神经功能缺失的严重程度无关。结论:脉压的增大与脑梗死的发生有关,是脑梗死发生的重要评价因素,但脉压的变化并不与脑梗死的严重程度相关。     

老年男性动脉硬化血压波动与脑梗死发生的关系

目的 探讨血压波动对老年男性脑梗死发生的影响.方法 1527例患有动脉硬化的老年(年龄＞65岁)男性患者,所有患者监测动态血压,根据有无脑梗死将入选患者分为2组:脑梗死组(607例)和非脑梗死组(920例),用数学平滑曲线方法先将每一个体24 h血压数据进行分析,再描绘出一条适合个体血压变化趋势的曲线,计算实际血压值与该趋势曲线相应位置所形成差值的标准差即为血压波动值,然后比较2组血压波动的情况.结果 脑梗死组中24 h的收缩压波动值明显高于非脑梗死组[(8.4±2.2)与(8.0±2.0)mm Hg,t=-2.909,P＜0.01];其中自昼收缩压血压波动明显升高[(8.2±2.2)与(7.8±2.1)mm Hg,t=-2.969,P＜0.01];而夜间收缩压波动2组差异无统计学意义[(8.9±3.9)与(8.7±3.7)mm Hg,P＞0.05];各阶段舒张期血压波动差异无统计学意义[24 h舒张压波动值(5.5±3.8)与(5.5±1.5)mm Hg,P＞0.05;白昼舒张压波动值(5.4±1.5)与(5.3±1.4)mm Hg,P＞0.05;夜间舒张压波动值(6.1±2.7)与(6.1±2.6)mm Hg,P＞0.05].结论 在老年男性动脉硬化相关疾病患者中,脑梗死的发生与白昼收缩压的波动密切相关,而与夜间收缩压和舒张压波动无关.

Abstract：

Objective , To investigate the influence of blood pressure variability on cerebral infarction in older men. Methods Ambulatory blood pressure was measured in 1527 elderly men ( older than 65 yrs) with atherosclerosis. All cases were divided into 2 groups: Six hundred and seven patients with cerebral infarction ( group A)and 920 patients without cerebral infarction ( group B). Smooth curve method was used to analyze each patient's ambulatory blood pressure data and the trend of each patient's blood pressure curve was portrayed. The differences between the actual blood pressure and the blood pressure on the curve was defined as blood pressure variability,and the blood pressure variability between the 2 groups was compared. Results The systolic blood pressure variability in 24 hours in group A was significantly higher than that in group B( [8.4'±2. 2]mm Hg vs [ 8.0 ± 2. 0 ] mm Hg, P ＜ 0. 01 ), especially for the systolic blood pressure variability in daytime( [ 8. 2 ± 2. 2 ] mm Hg vs [ 7. 8 ± 2. 1 ] mm Hg, P ＜ 0. 01 ). However, the systolic blood pressure variability at night was not significantly different between the 2 groups( [ 8.9 ± 3. 9 ] mm Hg vs [ 8. 7 ± 3.7 ] mm Hg,P ＞ 0. 05 ). There were no significant difference between the diastolic blood pressure of 24 hours( [5. 5 ± 3.8 ] mm Hg vs [5.5 ± 1.5 ]mm Hg,P ＞0. 05),during daytime([5.4 ± 1.5]mm Hg vs [5.3 ± 1.4] mm Hg,P ＞0.05)and nighttime ( [ 6. 1 ± 2.7 ] mm Hg vs [ 6. 1 ± 2. 6 ] mm Hg, P ＞ 0. 05 ). Conclusion In elderly men with atherosclerosis,cerebral infarction was closely related to systolic blood pressure variability,but independent of nighttime systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure variability.