现代中西医结合杂志
現代中西醫結閤雜誌
현대중서의결합잡지
MODERN JOURNAL OF INTEGRATED TRADITIONAL CHINESE AND WESTERN MEDICINE
2014年
33期
3652-3654
,共3页
魏艺%贾岱林%胡元会%肖响%孟昊%宋庆桥%杨传华
魏藝%賈岱林%鬍元會%肖響%孟昊%宋慶橋%楊傳華
위예%가대림%호원회%초향%맹호%송경교%양전화
老老年%高血压%舒张压%低密度脂蛋白
老老年%高血壓%舒張壓%低密度脂蛋白
로노년%고혈압%서장압%저밀도지단백
very elderly%hypertension%diastolic blood pressure%low density lipoprotein
目的:探讨老老年高血压患者不同舒张压水平低密度脂蛋白的特征。方法选择老老年高血压患者259例,均询问病史、行常规生化检查和动态血压监测;按照24 h 平均舒张压水平分组:1组≥80 mmHg(1 mmHg =0.133 kPa),2组70~79 mmHg,3组60~69 mmHg,4组50~59 mmHg,5组<50 mmHg;比较不同动态舒张压水平低密度脂蛋白水平。结果低密度脂蛋白水平1组(3.27±0.69)mmol/L,2组(2.48±0.56)mmol/L,3组(2.70±0.57) mmol/L,4组(2.67±0.63)mmol/L,5组(2.82±0.62)mmol/L,其中2组低密度脂蛋白水平最低,1,5组显著高于2,3,4组(P 均<0.05),5组低密度脂蛋白水平由低到高依次为2组<4组<3组<5组<1组。结论老老年高血压患者舒张压水平宜控制在70~79 mmHg,低密度脂蛋白水平最低,提示24 h 平均舒张压70~79 mmHg 或许可以成为老老年高血压患者舒张压的合理范围;舒张压过高和过低预后均较差。
目的:探討老老年高血壓患者不同舒張壓水平低密度脂蛋白的特徵。方法選擇老老年高血壓患者259例,均詢問病史、行常規生化檢查和動態血壓鑑測;按照24 h 平均舒張壓水平分組:1組≥80 mmHg(1 mmHg =0.133 kPa),2組70~79 mmHg,3組60~69 mmHg,4組50~59 mmHg,5組<50 mmHg;比較不同動態舒張壓水平低密度脂蛋白水平。結果低密度脂蛋白水平1組(3.27±0.69)mmol/L,2組(2.48±0.56)mmol/L,3組(2.70±0.57) mmol/L,4組(2.67±0.63)mmol/L,5組(2.82±0.62)mmol/L,其中2組低密度脂蛋白水平最低,1,5組顯著高于2,3,4組(P 均<0.05),5組低密度脂蛋白水平由低到高依次為2組<4組<3組<5組<1組。結論老老年高血壓患者舒張壓水平宜控製在70~79 mmHg,低密度脂蛋白水平最低,提示24 h 平均舒張壓70~79 mmHg 或許可以成為老老年高血壓患者舒張壓的閤理範圍;舒張壓過高和過低預後均較差。
목적:탐토로노년고혈압환자불동서장압수평저밀도지단백적특정。방법선택로노년고혈압환자259례,균순문병사、행상규생화검사화동태혈압감측;안조24 h 평균서장압수평분조:1조≥80 mmHg(1 mmHg =0.133 kPa),2조70~79 mmHg,3조60~69 mmHg,4조50~59 mmHg,5조<50 mmHg;비교불동동태서장압수평저밀도지단백수평。결과저밀도지단백수평1조(3.27±0.69)mmol/L,2조(2.48±0.56)mmol/L,3조(2.70±0.57) mmol/L,4조(2.67±0.63)mmol/L,5조(2.82±0.62)mmol/L,기중2조저밀도지단백수평최저,1,5조현저고우2,3,4조(P 균<0.05),5조저밀도지단백수평유저도고의차위2조<4조<3조<5조<1조。결론로노년고혈압환자서장압수평의공제재70~79 mmHg,저밀도지단백수평최저,제시24 h 평균서장압70~79 mmHg 혹허가이성위로노년고혈압환자서장압적합리범위;서장압과고화과저예후균교차。
Objective It is to approach the low -density lipoprotein characteristic in very elderly hypertensive patients with different levels of diastolic blood pressure.Methods 259 hospitalized cases of very elderly hypertensive patients were se-lected and asked about the history, routine biochemical tests and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; then divided them ac-cordance with the 24 -hour average diastolic pressure level: group 1 with levels of ≥ 80 mmHg, group 2 set of 70 to79 mm-Hg, group 3 set of 60 to 69 mmHg, group 4 set of 50 to 59 mmHg, group 5 set of <50 mmHg; the levels of LDL of different dynamic diastolic blood pressure were compared.Results The level of LDL was (3.27 ±0.69) mmol/L of group 1,(2.48 ± 0.66) mmol/L of group 2, (2.70 ±0.77) mmol/L of group 3, (2.67 ±0.83) mmol/L of group 4 and (2.82 ±0.62) mmol/L of group 5 respectively; the level of LDL in group 2 was the minimum; the LDL levels of group 1 and 5 were higher than those of group 2, 3, 4 (all P <0.05); the LDL level of five groups from low to high for the group 2 <group 4 <group 3 <group 5 <group 1.Conclusion The level of diastolic blood pressure in patients with hypertension should be controlled at 70 to 79 mmHg, the level of LDL is the lowest; this prompt that 24 -hour mean diastolic blood pressure of 70 to 79 mmHg could become very elderly hypertensive patients with diastolic reasonable range, and the diastolic blood pressure of too high and too low will be a poor prognosis.