4.7 Article

Pulsatile but not steady component of blood pressure predicts cardiovascular events in coronary patients

期刊

HYPERTENSION
卷 51, 期 4, 页码 848-855

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.101725

关键词

blood pressure; central pulse pressure; pulsatility; cardiovascular risk; atherosclerosis; coronary artery disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the differences between central and peripheral blood pressure (BP) values have been known for decades, the consequences of decision making based on peripheral rather than central BP have only recently been recognized. There are only a few studies assessing the relationship between intraaortic BP and cardiovascular risk. In addition, the relationship between central BP and the risk of cardiovascular events in a large group of coronary patients has not yet been evaluated. Therefore, the aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance of central BP-derived indices in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Invasive central BPs were taken at baseline, and study end points were ascertained during over a 4.5-year follow-up in 1109 consecutive patients. The primary end point (cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction or stroke or cardiac arrest or heart transplantation or myocardial revascularization) occurred in 246 (22.2%) patients. Central pulsatility was the most powerful predictor of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 1.48). Central pulse pressure was also independently related to the primary end point (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.43). Central mean BP as well as peripheral BP parameters were not independently related to the primary end point risk. Central pulsatility was also related to risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction or stroke. The pulsatile component of BP is the most important factor related to the cardiovascular risk in coronary patients. It is more closely associated with cardiovascular risk than steady component of BP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据