344例高血压患者社区就诊情况分析

目的：了解社区高血压控制率，探讨社区高血压防治工作。方法：随机抽取一个月首次就诊病人进行统计分析。结果：高血压达标率为62．09％，单药和联合用药治疗，以二联达标率最高，依次是单药、三联、四联和五联。高血压用药以CCB最多，依次为ARB、B受体阻滞剂、利尿剂和ACEI。难治性高血压占总病数的10．47％，联合用药类别品种越多，达标率越低。     

上海市邮电职工高血压知晓率、治疗率和控制率的调查

目的：了解上海市邮电职工高血压的知晓率、治疗率和控制率。方法：于１９９９年６月随机抽取上海市区邮电职工１０５４人（年龄２４～８２岁）进行血压测量和统一问卷调查。高血压人群定义为血压≥１４０／９０ｍｍＨｇ，或有高血压史及接受降压治疗者。结果：普查对象中查出为高血压的人为６５．５％知道自己的高血压；门诊的高血压病人有７５．３％知道自己有高血压。４４％的高血压病人在接受规范降压治疗，但仅２１．５％血压能控制在〈１４０／９０ｍｍＨｇ。结论：结果显示这一人群的高血压知晓率、治疗率和控制率仍不理想。     

696例高血压患者降压药物治疗效果分析

目的：了解原发性高血压（EH）患者的药物疗效,以便进一步提高高血压的控制率。方法：选择2009年12月至2011年12月连续2年来我院体检的4300人为对象,通过每年1次的健康体检和门诊治疗进行观察,并对696例高血压患者的降压药疗效进行统计分析。结果：4300例体检者中,确定为原发性高血压的患者810例（患病率18．8％）,其中696例（治疗率85．9％）患者使用口服降压药物治疗,单药治疗318例（45．7％）,联合用药治疗378例（54．3％）;高血压控制率90．8％（632／696）,其中单药控制率86．8％（276／318）,两药联用控制率94．70%（230／243）,三药联用控制率94．8％（55／58）,四药联用或固定复方制剂控制率92．2％（71／77）,联合用药组血压控制率显著高于单药治疗组（P〈0．05或〈0．01）。联合治疗中以钙拈抗剂使用率（57．9％）最高,其次为血管紧张素Ⅱ受体抑制剂使用率（42．2％）。结论：对于高血压患者联合用药血压控制率显著高于单药治疗。     

老年女性StanfordB型主动脉夹层患者的高血压特征及降压治疗

目的总结老年女性StanfordB型主动脉夹层（aorticdissection,AD）患者的高血压特征及降压治疗方法。方法选择2002年4月至2011年7月期间入住沈阳军区总医院治疗且年龄≥60岁的StanfordB型AD患者,按性别分为老年男性组（67例）及老年女性组（41例）,年龄分别为（66．8±5．3）岁和（65．5±4．6）岁：对两组的高血压特征及降压治疗情况进行回顾性分析。结果老年男性组和老年女性组年龄及吸烟、糖尿病、冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病（冠心病）、高脂血症、原发性高血压（高血压）、穿透性动脉粥样硬化性溃疡及伴发心功能不全、肾功能不全、低氧血症比例比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。老年女性组高血压病史知情比例低于老年男性组[71．1％（27／38）vs．88．9％（56／63）,P〈0．05],入院首诊高血压比例高于老年男性组[28．9％（11／38）vs．11．1％（7／63）,P〈0．05],差异均有统计学意义。两组高血压1级、2级、3级比例比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组入院最高收缩压,人院脉压差．治疗后收缩压、舒张压及脉压差比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;但老年女性组入院最高舒张压高于老年男性组,差异有统计学意义[（117．4±23．8）mmHg vs．（103．9±17．3）mmHg,P〈0．05;1mmHg=0．133kPa]。两组患者多采用联合药物降压,选用静脉用降压药物比例及口服降压药物种类数比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。老年女性组应用利尿药的比例高于老年男性组,差异有统计学意义[34．2％（13／38）vs.9．5％（6／63）,P〈0．05]。随访期间两组血压治疗达标率、总病死率及夹层相关病死率比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论老年女性StanfordB型AD患者对高血压的知晓率低,入院舒张压高,经正规的降压治疗后,可获得较理想的血压达标率。对老年女性患者需重视早期诊断,合理用药,积极控制血压,以期降低病死率,改善预后。     

高血压患者收缩压控制率

目的 了解目前接受药物治疗的高血压患者收缩压达标率，医师对收缩压达标的认识及临床高血压用药情况。方法 采用调查问卷进行横断面调查，内容包括医师(2291人)和患者(8952人)两部分。医师填写患者收缩压达标的比例，干预收缩压最有效的降压药物。患者部分也由医师填写，包括患者的高血压及相关病史，家族史等，检查结果，治疗情况。结果 患者的收缩压达标率57％，而主观认为达标率大于50％的医生约占30％。经过高血压药物治疗，患者的收缩压幅度下降。随年龄、血压水平和危险分层的增加，收缩压降压幅度也相应增加，但是收缩压的达标率相对较低。心肌梗死、心力衰竭和脑卒中患者的收缩压降压幅度较大，控制率也较高。而糖尿病患者，降压幅度较小，控制率也较低。联合用药的患者降压幅度高于单一用药。收缩压下降的同时舒张压也相应下降，血压水平和危险分层高的患者舒张压下降幅度较大。患者平时使用最多的和医师主观上认为的最有效的降压药物都是钙拮抗剂。结论高血压患者经治疗后收缩压下降，高危患者的治疗需要高度重视，且开始治疗即可联合用药。临床高血压用药以钙拮抗剂为主。     

社区首诊病人高血压知晓率，治疗率和控制率调查分析

目的 了解社区卫生服务中心病人高血压自晓率，治疗率和控制率。方法 取2001年11月来院35岁以上初诊病人，进行血压测量和问卷调查。高血压人群定义为血压≥140／90mmhg，或有高血压史及接受降压治疗。结果 门诊首诊患高血压占31.8%，知道自己有高血压的占65％，41％病人接受规范治疗，但仅25％的病人能控制在＜140/90mmhg。结论 临汾社区这一人群高血压知晓率，治疗率和控制率仍不理想。     

联合与单药治疗高血压病疗效及安全性分析

目的探讨卡托普利与硝苯地平缓释片联合治疗原发性高血压（EH）临床降压疗效与安全性。方法74例EH患者随机分为单独和联合使用卡托普利和硝苯地平缓释片降压药治疗的三组进行分析。结果卡托普利组、硝苯地平缓释片组和联合用药三组治疗后血压均明显降低，但联合用药组在降收缩压方面疗效较明显。在咳嗽方面，卡托普利组发生率高（17．4％），联合用药组次之（7．7％）。在心悸、面潮红方面，硝苯地平缓释片组发生率高（24％），联合用药组次之（3．8％）。结论卡托普利和硝苯地平缓释片联合用药增加降压效果，而且可减少副作用。     

缬沙坦联合左旋氨氯地平减少高血压患者蛋白尿的疗效观察

目的比较缬沙坦单药治疗与缬沙坦联合左旋氨氯地平治疗高血压合并蛋白尿的临床疗效。方法入选高血压合并蛋白尿的患者80例,随机分为联合治疗组,即缬沙坦80mg／d联合左旋氨氯地平5mg／d和单药治疗组即缬沙坦80mg／d组,每组40例,治疗1月,比较治疗前后血压、尿素氮（BUN）、尿微量清蛋白（mALB）、尿β2微球蛋白（β2MG）、血肌酐（Cr）的变化。结果与治疗前比较,2组患者血压均明显下降（P〈0．01）,mALB、β2MG,Cr均显著降低（P〈0．01）。联合用药组降压达标率、降压时间和降尿蛋白作用优于单治疗药组（P〈0．05）。结论缬沙坦联合左旋氨氯地平能够更有效地降低血压,减少蛋白尿,保护肾脏功能。     

社区老年高血压患者用药依从性影响因素分析

目的：了解影响社区老年高血压患者用药依从性的因素,探讨提高其用药依从性方法。方法：对辖区内建立高血压随访卡、年龄61—80岁之间、血压控制为“良”或“差”的患者共304例进行问卷调查。结果：有56．6％老年患者血压控制欠佳,高血压用药依从率仅为29．9％;患者的用药依从性与经济条件、文化程度、病程长短、年龄等相关。另外,影响用药依从性的其他因素还有忘记服药时间（61．0％）,认为血压已控制不需再服药（60．6％）,担心长期服药副作用（50．7％）等。结论：社区老年高血压患者血压控制的任务仍很艰巨。医护人员要深入社区,加强对老年高血压患者的健康教育,使患者认识药物治疗对控制血压的重要性,提高用药依从率。     

成人糖尿病患者健康管理状况调查

调查白银市糖尿病治疗中心30岁以上连续住院的糖尿病患者431例。结果住院病人T2DM占95．6％。慢性并发症总发生率为74．0％,主要慢性并发症的发生率依次为N（70．8％）、高血压（35．0％）、DN（33．9％）和DR（19．7％）。平均HbA1c为8．4％。糖尿病患者院前OAD使用率为51．7％,胰岛素使用率仅为14．2％,而未治疗率高达34．1％,住院期间胰岛素或联合OAD的治疗率达到了75．4％。结论中老年人T2DM仍是我们目前和今后防治的重点对象。糖尿病患者慢性并发症发生率高。糖尿病患者HbA1c控制达标率低。院前未治疗率高,胰岛素或联合OAD使用率低。     

高龄男性原发性高血压患者降压药物应用现状

目的探讨高龄男性原发性高血压患者的降压药物治疗现状,为临床治疗提供参考。方法对106例75岁以上男性原发性高血压患者出院时降压药物应用方案进行登记并行χ2检验。结果应用最多的是长效钙离子拮抗剂(CCB,77.35%)、其次是β受体阻滞剂(46.23%)、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(40.57%)、血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂(28.30%)、利尿剂(26.42%)和α受体阻滞剂(0.94%),长效CCB明显高于其他种类降压药物,有78.31%的患者需要两种以上降压药物的联合治疗,平均服降压药物种类(2.19±0.86)种例。结论高龄男性原发性高血压患者适用于以长效CCB为基础的小剂量联合降压治疗方案,而利尿剂不是其一线药物。     

Exceptional early blood pressure control rates: the ACCOMPLISH trial

BACKGROUND: ACCOMPLISH is a "new-generation" hypertension trial assessing single-tablet combination therapy for initial treatment of high-risk hypertension. At baseline, 97% of subjects were treated with anti-hypertensive medication at entry, but only 37% of participants had blood pressure (BP) control (<140/90 mmHg). Single-tablet combination therapy may improve control rates. METHODS: The mean BP change from baseline at the end of 6 months (the time point when subjects should have had all of the drug titrations to achieve BP control) was examined for 10,704 randomized patients. Within-group changes were examined using t-tests. Comparisons between subgroups were made using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Mean (+/-SD) BP fell from 145+/-18/80+/-11 mmHg at randomization to 132+/-16/74+/-10 mmHg. The 6-month BP control rate was 73% in the overall trial (78% in the US), 43% in diabetics and 40% in patients with renal disease. Of the patients uncontrolled, 61% were not on maximal medications, suggesting potential increases in control rates. Serious hypotensive events occurred in 1.8% of participants. CONCLUSION: ACCOMPLISH BP control rates are the highest of any multi-national trial to date. Whereas current guidelines recommend combination therapy only for stage 2 hypertension, in this trial it is expedient and safe for both stage 1 and 2 hypertension.     

上海市维持性血液透析患者高血压现状的多中心调查

目的 了解维持性血液透析(血透)患者高血压的患病和治疗情况,为血透患者的高血压诊断和治疗提供依据.方法 对上海市11家透析中心的1382例维持性血透患者进行横断面调查,其中男性809例,女性573例.结果 (1)本次受访的维持性血透患者高血压患病率为86.3%,治疗率96.8%,控制率[血透前血压＜140/90 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)]25.5%;(2)50.4%患者应用一种降压药,应用2、3和4种或以上者占34.4%、14.2%和1.0%.单药用药以钙通道阻滞剂为多(61.0%),血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂分别为56.4%和6.4%,中枢性降压药物为26.4%,β或α、β阻滞剂为14.0%.联合用药以钙通道阻滞剂联合血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂最常用(63.2%);(3)冠心病、透析充分性和用药数量影响血透患者的高血压控制率,冠心病以及联合用药者高血压控制更困难,而充分透析有助于提高高血压控制率.结论 维持性血透患者中高血压极为常见,患病率和治疗率均较高,但控制率很低,降压药物的联合应用不够.维持性血透患者的血压控制情况受透析充分性、心脏疾病、降压药物使用情况等多种因素影响.     

北京社区老年人群高血压防治现况的综合评价

目的:综合评价北京老年人群高血压防治现况。方法:在宣武区、海淀区和通州区各选择1～2个社区，分别代表北京市城区、城乡结合部和农村。对调查社区60岁以上的老年人按20％的比例抽样，人户调查。结果:农村地区老年人高血压患病率最高，为64．3％，城乡结合部次之，为61．0％，城区最低，为53．4％；而农村老年人高血压的知晓率、药物与非药物治疗率、控制率、血压测量率、高血压及相关疾病的知识得分远低于城区和城乡结合部。在钙离子拮抗剂、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂、β受体阻滞剂、利尿剂和复方降压药这几类降压药中，复方类降压药物是老年人高血压患者的首选药物，特别是在农村和城乡结合部，分别达88．5％和83．7％。决定患者使用何种抗高血压药物的主要因素是疗效、医嘱和价格。社区卫生服务中心在高血压防治中发挥了主要作用，电视和广播是老年人获得健康知识和信息的主要来源。结论北京市农村老年人高血压防治工作急待加强，通过电视和广播加强健康教育是有效而重要的手段。     

Angina in hypertensive patients. With particular reference to the negative chronotropic effects of sympatholytic therapy.

There was no significant difference in the blood pressure and heart rate response of hypertensive patients with and without angina to standardised exercise on a treadmill before and after anti-hypertensive treatment. There was no improvement in exercise tolerance in the hypertensive patients with angina treated with bethanidine, debrisoquine or guanethidine despite a reduction of resting and exercise heart rates after treatment. The negative chronotropic effect of these sympatholytic drugs was less than that of oxprenolol or propranolol, but the hypotensive response was greater. Both of these beta-receptor blocking drug produced an an improvement in exercise tolerance in patients with angina either alone or in combination with other hypotensive therapy. The best control of blood pressure and angina was often achieved by a combination of a sympatholytic drug and beta-receptor blocking drug. In hypertensive patients treated for several years, angina at presentation was occassionally reduced by reduction of blood pressure. Later onset of angina appeared to be unrelated to control of hypertension but to be due to coincidental coronary occlusion. There was no evidence that myocardial infarction was precipitated by postural or exercise hypotension although these effects occasionally precipitated angina.     

中老年高血压病患者康复干预效果分析

目的探讨康复干预对中老年高血压病患者动态血压及高血压危险因素的影响。方法63例中老年高血压病患者随机分为干预组32例,对照组31例。干预组患者在口服抗高血压药治疗的同时,给予综合康复干预3个月,观察干预前后24小时动态血压、血脂、空腹血糖、体重指数以及摄盐、吸烟量、饮酒量等指标的变化。对照组只给予口服硝苯地平治疗。结果观察3个月后,2组的血压均降低,干预组血压下降更显著(P<0.05),干预组患者血胆固醇、甘油三酯、空腹血糖及体重指数均有明显下降(P<0.05),而高密度脂蛋白则上升明显(P<0.05),摄盐、饮酒量、吸烟量等均有显著下降(P<0.01),对照组患者饮酒量、吸烟量也有明显下降(P<0.05),但干预组更加显著(P<0.01)。结论综合康复干预可明显降低中老年高血压病患者动态血压及高血压危险因素水平,这对预防高血压并发症的发生有重要的作用。     

Renal artery denervation for treating refractory hypertension

Arterial hypertension is a major healthcare issue affecting between 30 and 40% of the adult population in industrialized countries. Despite the availability of numerous pharmaceutical treatments, arterial hypertension often remains uncontrolled. A non-negligible percentage of patients are refractory to multiple-drug therapy, which exposes them to an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Percutaneous, renal denervation using a catheter connected to a low energy radiofrequency generator has proven effective in decreasing arterial pressure in patients resistant to medical therapy, by reducing afferent nerve activity. In order to be eligible for this therapeutic approach, patients must have uncontrolled essential hypertension despite treatment with a combination of three anti-hypertensive drugs including a diuretic agent, and ≥ 45 mL/min glomerular filtration rate. The initial registry study demonstrated that catheter-based sympathetic renal denervation was a simple and safe procedure resulting in a significant and durable reduction in arterial pressure. Subsequently, a randomized controlled trial (the Symplicity HTN-2 trial) showed a mean 32/12 mmHg decrease in blood pressure measurements in the group of patients who underwent renal denervation whereas no difference was observed in the control group. The reduction in blood pressure was still present at 24-month follow-up. No procedure-related complications were reported and no instances of renal artery stenosis or aneurysmal dilatation were evidenced during the follow-up period. No cases of renal function impairment or deterioration were recorded. This technique seems to be a promising strategy in patients suffering from this serious condition. In order to demonstrate the actual benefit of this technique, we report the case of two patients who underwent renal denervation in our institution.     

Diabetes and hypertension: pathogenesis, prevention and treatment

Hypertension occurs in approximately 30% of patients with type 1 diabetes and from 50 to 80% of patients with type 2 diabetes. Although the pathogenesis of hypertension is distinct in each type, hypertension markedly enhances the already high risk of cardiovascular and renal disease in types 1 and 2 and implications for treatment are similar in both. The threshold for blood pressure treatment in diabetic patients is generally agreed to be 140/90 mm/hg with a target BP of < 130/80. So-called "lifestyle modifications" play an important role in therapy, particularly in type 2 patients, by decreasing blood pressure and improving other risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Indeed non-pharmacologic interventions have been demonstrated to prevent the development of type 2 diabetes in patients at high risk to develop the disease. Aggressive anti-hypertensive drug treatment is warranted given the high risk associated with the combination of diabetes and hypertension and the demonstrated effectiveness of anti-hypertensive treatment in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in this group of patients. ACE inhibitors and ARBs are the cornerstones of pharmacologic management, in no small part because of the renoprotective effects of these agents in antagonizing the development and progression of diabetic renal disease. Multiple agents, including diuretics, will usually be required to attain target blood pressure levels.     

Management of older patients with hypertension in primary care: improvement on the rule of halves

OBJECTIVES: the benefits of treatment of hypertension in older people are well-established but implementation of this knowledge may be sub-optimal. We have determined recent primary care management of older people with hypertension. METHODS: we examined health records (n = 6986) of a 1 in 7 sample of patients aged 65-80 years from a random sample of practices (n = 51) in the former Northern Region of the UK, stratified by health authority, for the previous 6 years. We recorded documented risk factors, diagnosis of hypertension, three most recent blood pressure readings, current drug therapy and previous blood pressure lowering therapy, and presence of coexistent pathology. RESULTS: blood pressure was defined as hypertensive (> or = 160/> or = 90 mmHg; one or both values above these limits), normotensive or undetermined using a validated algorithm. In 30% of patients, blood pressure status was undetermined. Thirty-five percent of subjects were found to be hypertensive. Of these, 70% were receiving antihypertensive treatment but only 30% of treated patients had controlled (< 150 and 90 mmHg) and 13% well controlled (< 140 and 85 mmHg) blood pressure. In all, 14% of older hypertensive patients were detected, treated and had their hypertension controlled. There were significant differences between practices in the proportion of hypertensive patients treated (P < 0.001) and in the proportion of hypertensive patients whose blood pressure was controlled (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: treatment of hypertension in older people in primary care has improved in terms of detection and treatment but in only one-third of patients is high blood pressure controlled. There remain important opportunities for prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction in this age group through achieving improved blood pressure control.