4.3 Article

Heart rate and pulse pressure amplification in hypertensive subjects

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 363-370

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-7061(03)00063-3

关键词

hypertension; systolic and pulse pressure; gender; cardiovascular risk; arterial stiffness; wave reflections

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although mean blood pressure (MBP) remains unmodified along the arterial tree, pulse pressure (PP) increases physiologically from the central to the peripheral arteries. Amplification of PP is known to be influenced by heart rate (HR), but the impact of this alteration has never been tested in patients with hypertension. Methods: A total of 712 hypertensive subjects, either treated or untreated, were divided into three classes of HR level. Carotid and brachial systolic blood pressure (SBP), carotid augmentation index, a marker of wave reflections, and carotid- brachial PP amplification were measured using applanation tonometry. Results: Independent of age, sex, and antihypertensive drugs, subjects with HR >80 beats/min were characterized, in comparison with those with lower HR, by reduced carotid SBP, PP, and augmentation index, resulting in a significant increase in PP amplification. In men but not in women, this pattern was associated with higher values of brachial SBP and DBP and by higher incidences of elevated glycemia and atherosclerotic alterations. In the male population, PP amplifications was, independent of HR, associated with the presence of beta blocking agents (negative association) and elevated plasma glucose. Conclusions: Hypertensive men and women with high HR have significant PP amplifications, principally because of reduced central SBP and disturbed wave reflections. beta-blocking agents and plasma glucose independently alter PP amplification in men but not in women. Whether these opposite patterns influence the gender difference in cardiovascular risk should be prospectively studied. (C) 2003 American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd.

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