4.3 Article

Natural History of Hypertension Subtypes in Young and Middle-Age Adults

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 531-537

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2009.21

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Padova, Padova, Italy
  2. Associazione 18 Maggio 1370, San Daniele del Friuli, Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND The evolution of hypertension (HT) subtypes in young-to-middle-age subjects is unclear. METHODS We did a prospective study in 1,141 participants aged 18-45 years from the HARVEST study screened for stage I HT, and 101 nonhypertensive subjects of control during a median follow-up of 72.9 months. RESULTS At baseline, 13.8% of the subjects were classified as having isolated systolic HT (ISH), 24.8% as having isolated diastolic HT (IDH), and 61.4% as having systolic-diastolic HT (SDH). All hypertensive groups developed sustained HT (clinic blood pressure >= 140/90 mm Hg from two consecutive visits occurring at least after >= 6 months of observation) more frequently than nonhypertensive subjects (P < 0.001 for all) with adjusted odds ratio of 5.2 (95%CI 2.9-9.2) among the SDH subjects, 2.6 (95%CI 1.5-4.5) among the IDH subjects, and 2.2 (95%CI 1.2-4.5) among the ISH subjects. When the definition of HT was based on ambulatory blood pressure (mean daytime blood pressure >= 135/85 mm Hg, n = 798), odds ratios were 5.1 (95%CI 3.1-8.2),5.6 (95%CI 3.2-9.8), and 3.3 (95%CI 1.7-6.3), respectively. In the fully adjusted logistic model, the risk of ambulatory HT was smaller for the ISH than the IDH (P = 0.049) or SDH (P = 0.053) individuals. CONCLUSIONS The present results indicate that young-to-middle-age subjects with ISH have a smaller risk of developing ambulatory HT than either subjects with SDH or IDH. Whether anti hypertensive treatment can be postponed for long periods of time in young subjects with mild elevations of clinic systolic BP and low global cardiovascular risk should be examined in further studies.

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

4.3
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