Blood pressure monitoring · 2023
Central blood pressure obtained by cuff-based oscillometry as a determinant of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abdelmegid Mohamed Aboel-Kassem F, Fouad Doaa A, Beshay Nardeen W M, Mahran Dalia G, Shams-Eddin Hamdy
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Limited and conflicting data have been reported on the prognostic relevance of central blood pressure (CBP) compared with brachial blood pressure (BP) in the anticipation of hypertension-mediated organ damage and the majority of data derived using applanation tonometry with its known complexities. The objective of the present study was to investigate the diagnostic factors of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) with a special highlight on the utility of non-invasive oscillometric CBP measurement and derived hemodynamic indices compared to brachial BP as indicators of LVH.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 300 hypertensive patients (mean age 55.3 years, 61.3% female, 51.7% obese) with a mean duration of hypertension was 5.8 years. They underwent measurement of brachial BP, using a mercury sphygmomanometer, and CBP, using a Mobil-O-Graph, alongside the determination of left ventricular (LV) mass by two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography. LVH and LV geometric patterns were defined by LV mass index/height 2.7 and relative wall thickness.
RESULTS: Bivariate then multivariate analysis showed that age, BMI, central systolic BP (SBP), and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were significant determinants of LVH and optimally controlled brachial BP was a significant negative determinant for LVH. Central SBP had an acceptable diagnostic performance to determine LVH in patients with hypertension (AUC = 0.722, 95% confidence interval: 0.618-0.824, SE = 0.21, P -value <0.001). Using one-way ANOVA, a comparison of means among age groups showed that the steady increase in central SBP and PWV with aging was greater among LVH patients than non-LVH patients.
CONCLUSION: Estimated central SBP using Mobil-O-Graph showed a significantly higher correlation to LVH than brachial SBP values. The consistent increase in central SBP and PWV with aging was greater among LVH patients than non-LVH patients.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 300 hypertensive patients (mean age 55.3 years, 61.3% female, 51.7% obese) with a mean duration of hypertension was 5.8 years. They underwent measurement of brachial BP, using a mercury sphygmomanometer, and CBP, using a Mobil-O-Graph, alongside the determination of left ventricular (LV) mass by two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography. LVH and LV geometric patterns were defined by LV mass index/height 2.7 and relative wall thickness.
RESULTS: Bivariate then multivariate analysis showed that age, BMI, central systolic BP (SBP), and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were significant determinants of LVH and optimally controlled brachial BP was a significant negative determinant for LVH. Central SBP had an acceptable diagnostic performance to determine LVH in patients with hypertension (AUC = 0.722, 95% confidence interval: 0.618-0.824, SE = 0.21, P -value <0.001). Using one-way ANOVA, a comparison of means among age groups showed that the steady increase in central SBP and PWV with aging was greater among LVH patients than non-LVH patients.
CONCLUSION: Estimated central SBP using Mobil-O-Graph showed a significantly higher correlation to LVH than brachial SBP values. The consistent increase in central SBP and PWV with aging was greater among LVH patients than non-LVH patients.