4.3 Article

Left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with autonomic failure

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 19, Issue 10, Pages 1049-1054

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2006.02.016

Keywords

left ventricular hypertrophy; hypertensive heart disease; autonomic neuropathy; blood pressure variability; orthostatic hypotension

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In autonomic failure (AF), supine hypertension may predispose patients to end-organ damage. The pathophysiology of hypertensive heart disease in AF is not known. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prevalence and predisposing factors of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with AF. Methods: We studied 25 patients with AF (67 +/- 8 years); 80% were being treated for orthostatic hypotension. Twenty patients with essential hypertension (68 6 years) were considered as the control group. All subjects underwent echocardiography for measurement of left ventricular mass (LVM). The patients with AF underwent a 24-h BP monitoring and long-term blood pressure (BP) variability was calculated as standard deviation (SD) of the average of the half-hour mean values. Results: The LVM is comparable in patients with AF 2 2 and hypertensive controls (145 +/- 35 g/m(2) v 127 +/- 32 g/m(2), P = .07). The proportion of patients with LVH is similar in both populations (AF 80%, hypertensive 70%). The patients with AF were divided into two groups, with and without LVH. The SDs are significantly higher in AF patients with LVH than in those with normal LVM (SD 24-h systolic BP: 22 +/- 4 v 14 +/- 1 mm Hg, P = .001). Conclusions: A high proportion of patients with AF show LVH. The LVM values are comparable with those of patients with essential hypertension. The development of LVH seems to depend on high BP variability, characteristic of AF patients. Detection of LVH may help in the choice of treatment for orthostatic hypotension and in the prevention of heart failure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available