4.0 Article

Association of 24-h urinary salt excretion with central haemodynamics and assessment of food categories contributing to salt consumption in Portuguese patients with hypertension

期刊

BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 303-310

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000005

关键词

central pressure; hypertension; nutrition; salt in food; salt intake

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveHigh salt intake has been associated with the development of arterial hypertension, but it still remains controversial as to how salt consumption relates with central haemodynamics and central pressures. For interventional purposes, it is crucial to identify the main food categories that contribute toward high salt consumption. MethodsIn 638 Caucasian hypertensive patients (age 5015 years, 329 women) enrolled for 7 years, we evaluate the independent relationship between urinary sodium (UNa+, mean 20778 mEq/24 h) or potassium (UK+, mean 79 +/- 26 mEq/24 h) excretion measured in validated 24-h samples and office blood pressure (BP), 24 h BP, central pulse pressure, and parameters of central pulse wave analysis. A subgroup (n=154) of this population (UNa+, mean 205 +/- 75 mEq/24 h) was also subjected to structured validated food frequency questionnaires on dietary habits. ResultsMultiple regression analysis showed that UNa+ was associated independently with increases in 24-h systolic BP, central pulse pressure, and augmented aortic augmentation index (AIx) and associated inversely with pulse pressure amplification. In the subgroup, patients of the upper tercile of distribution of UNa+ (288 +/- 21 mEq/24 h) ate significantly higher amounts (g/day) of vegetables, sauces, bread, cheese, fries and sausages/cold meat, yielding an estimation that bread could account for 20-27% of all daily salt intake. ConclusionReduction of salt intake on the basis of the main food sources that we have identified could also influence cardiovascular risk throughout effects on 24-h and central pressures.

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

4.0
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