[The predictive value of the ambulatory blood pressure monitoring parameters on left ventricular hypertrophy and carotid artery intima-media thickness in hypertensives].
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the predictive value of the ambulatory blood pressure monitoring parameters on left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT) in the hypertensives.


METHODS
We evaluated 147 hypertensive patients who were never treated regularly before. All patients underwent ultrasound examinations of the heart and the IMT of carotid arteries. We classified them as LVH group (n = 45) or no LVH group (n = 102), and as IMT increased group (n = 52) or no IMT increased group (n = 95). The record of medical history, physical examination and 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) were performed in all the patients. The biochemical parameters such as blood lipids, glucose and so on were tested. Then the data comparison was made.


RESULTS
(1) There were no significant differences in clinical manifestations and biochemical parameters between the LVH and no LVH groups (P > 0.05). Age (68.3 +/- 6.2) year vs (65.6 +/- 5.8) year, male 75.6% vs 66.7%, body mass index (24.1 +/- 4.1) vs (23.8 +/- 4.7) (kg/m(2)), diabetes mellitus and(or) impaired glucose tolerance 40.0% vs 38.2%, angina pectoris 42.3% vs 38.9%, cerebral vascular diseases 19.2% vs 15.7%, total cholesterol (5.40 +/- 1.42) vs (5.28 +/- 1.46) mmol/L, triglycerides (1.80 +/- 1.02) vs (1.74 +/- 1.08) mmol/L, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (4.03 +/- 1.43) vs (4.06 +/- 1.48) mmol/L, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (1.00 +/- 0.30) vs (0.99 +/- 0.26) mmol/L. (2) The parameters of ABPM in LVH group were higher than those in no LVH group. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in 24 h mean systolic blood pressure (140.7 +/- 14.1) vs (128.3 +/- 12.3) mm Hg, 24 h mean diastolic blood pressure (86.4 +/- 8.9) vs (81.6 +/- 9.3) mm Hg, daytime mean systolic blood pressure (142.8 +/- 13.9) vs (130.9 +/- 11.1) mm Hg, daytime mean diastolic blood pressure (86.9 +/- 8.8) vs (83.4 +/- 9.0) mm Hg, nighttime mean systolic blood pressure (129.0 +/- 13.2) vs (114.6 +/- 11.4) mm Hg, nighttime mean diastolic blood pressure (77.2 +/- 9.4) vs (67.5 +/- 8.1) mm Hg, 24 h pulse pressure (54.2 +/- 10.2) vs (46.9 +/- 9.6) mm Hg, daytime pulse pressure (55.9 +/- 10.5) vs (47.5 +/- 9.1) mm Hg, nighttime pulse pressure (51.8 +/- 10.7) vs (47.1 +/- 8.7) mm Hg, 24 h systolic blood pressure variance (8.4 +/- 2.0) vs (7.2 +/- 1.9), 24 h diastolic blood pressure variance (9.5 +/- 2.2) vs (8.0 +/- 2.1), the non-dipper rhythm of ambulatory blood pressure 55.6% vs 25.5%. (3) There were also no significant differences in clinical manifestations between the IMT increased and no IMT increased group (P > 0.05). While there were significant differences between the IMT increased and no IMT increased group in those parameters of ABPM (P < 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS
There were more LVH or IMT increased persons in the hypertensives whose ABPM parameters were abnormal.
Wang
De-xian
DX
Geratology Department, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China. wangdexian@medmail.com.cn
Zhao
Wei
W
Sun
Yan-shu
YS
Tian
Qing-ping
QP
Chen
Yan
Y
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001794:Blood Pressure; D018660:Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; D002339:Carotid Arteries / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D006973:Hypertension / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology* / Q000503:physiopathology*; D017379:Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D014463:Ultrasonography