11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Valor clínico da monitorização ambulatorial da pressão arterial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Circadian blood pressure changes and left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension.

          The effects of circadian blood pressure (BP) changes on the echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy were investigated in 235 consecutive subjects (137 unselected untreated patients with essential hypertension and 98 healthy normotensive subjects) who underwent 24-hour noninvasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and cross-sectional and M-mode echocardiography. In the hypertensive group, LV mass index correlated with nighttime (8:00 PM to 6:00 AM) systolic (r = 0.51) and diastolic (r = 0.35) blood pressure more closely than with daytime (6:00 AM to 8:00 PM) systolic (r = 0.38) and diastolic (r = 0.20) BP, or with casual systolic (r = 0.33) and diastolic (r = 0.27) BP. Hypertensive patients were divided into two groups by presence (group 1) and absence (group 2) of a reduction of both systolic and diastolic BP during the night by an average of more than 10% of the daytime pressure. Casual BP, ambulatory daytime systolic and diastolic BP, sex, body surface area, duration of hypertension, prevalence of diabetes, quantity of sleep during monitoring, funduscopic changes, and serum creatinine did not differ between the two groups. LV mass index, after adjustment for the age, the sex, the height, and the daytime BP differences between the two groups (analysis of covariance) was 82.4 g/m2 in the normotensive patient group, 83.5 g/m2 in hypertensive patients of group 1 and 98.3 g/m2 in hypertensive patients of group 2 (normotensive patients vs. group 1, p = NS; group 1 vs. group 2, p = 0.002).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            DIPPERS AND NON-DIPPERS

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ambulatory blood pressure. An independent predictor of prognosis in essential hypertension.

              To determine the prognostic significance of ambulatory blood pressure, we prospectively followed for up to 7.5 years (mean, 3.2) 1187 subjects with essential hypertension and 205 healthy normotensive control subjects who had baseline off-therapy 24-hour noninvasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Prevalence of white coat hypertension, defined by an average daytime ambulatory blood pressure lower than 131/86 mm Hg in women and 136/87 mm Hg in men in clinically hypertensive subjects, was 19.2%. Cardiovascular morbidity, expressed as the number of combined fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events per 100 patient-years, was 0.47 in the normotensive group, 0.49 in the white coat hypertension group, 1.79 in dippers with ambulatory hypertension, and 4.99 in nondippers with ambulatory hypertension. After adjustment for traditional risk markers for cardiovascular disease, morbidity did not differ between the normotensive and white coat hypertension groups (P = .83). Compared with the white coat hypertension group, cardiovascular morbidity increased in ambulatory hypertension in dippers (relative risk, 3.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.13 to 12.5), with a further increase of morbidity in nondippers (relative risk, 6.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.92 to 20.32). After adjustment for age, sex, diabetes, and echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (relative risk versus subjects with normal left ventricular mass, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 3.22), cardiovascular morbidity in ambulatory hypertension was higher (P = .0002) in nondippers than in dippers in women (relative risk, 6.79; 95% confidence interval, 2.45 to 18.82) but not in men (P = .91). Our findings suggest that ambulatory blood pressures stratifies cardiovascular risk in essential hypertension independent of clinic blood pressure and other traditional risk markers including echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                ramb
                Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
                Rev. Assoc. Med. Bras.
                Associação Médica Brasileira (São Paulo, SP, Brazil )
                0104-4230
                1806-9282
                December 1998
                : 44
                : 4
                : 325-330
                Affiliations
                [01] New Haven CT orgnameYale University orgdiv1School of Medicine orgdiv2Departamento de Nefrologia EUA
                [02] Farmington CT orgnameUniversity of Connecticut orgdiv1School of Medicine orgdiv2Departamento de Hipertensão EUA
                Article
                S0104-42301998000400012 S0104-4230(98)04400412
                10.1590/S0104-42301998000400012
                10ece9e7-1241-4d05-bda6-fee4395d60b4

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 51, Pages: 6
                Product

                SciELO Brazil

                Categories
                Artigos de Revisão

                Monitoring,Aferição,Monitorização ambulatorial,Ambulatory blood pressure,Measurement,Pressão arterial

                Comments

                Comment on this article