Correlation Between 2D Strain and Classic Echocardiographic Indices in the Diagnosis of Right Ventricular Dysfunction in COPD.

Purpose: This study aims to define which of the right ventricular myocardial deformation indices best correlates with the classic echocardiographic measurements and indices of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients and Methods: Ninety-one patients with stable COPD underwent clinical evaluation, spirometry, a 6-minute walk test, and echocardiographic examination. Patients were divided into two groups: "with RV dysfunction" (≥1 classic parameter) and "without RV dysfunction". We used speckle tracking to estimate myocardial deformation. For all analyses, results were considered significant if p < 0.05. Results: The mean age across all participants was 65 ± 9 years, with 53% (48/91) being male. Patients in the group with RV dysfunction were able to walk shorter distances and had higher estimated right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) and mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP). The RV free wall longitudinal strain (RVFWLS) was the only deformation indices that showed a significant correlation with all classic measurements and indices in the diagnosis of RV dysfunction (Wald test, 10.24; p < 0.01; odds ratio, 1.61). In the ROC curve analysis, the absolute value <20% was the lowest cut-off point of this index for detection of RV dysfunction (AUC = 0.93, S: 95.8%, and E: 88%). Conclusion: In COPD patients, RVFWLS is the myocardial deformation index that best correlates with classic echocardiographic parameters for the diagnosis of RV dysfunction using <20% as a cut-off point.

Automedida da pressão arterial para o controle das cifras tensionais e para a adesão ao tratamento / Self measurement of blood pressure for control of blood pressure levels and adherence to treatment

FUNDAMENTO: A medida da pressão arterial (PA) pelo próprio paciente, sem protocolos rígidos, com treinamento adequado, aparelhos validados e no próprio domicílio, é definida como automedida da pressão arterial (AMPA). OBJETIVO: Avaliar a interferência da AMPA na adesão ao tratamento e no controle pressórico. MÉTODOS: Participaram do estudo 57 pacientes, 38 no grupo de estudo (GE) e 19 no grupo de controle (GC). Esses pacientes foram seguidos por 12 meses e avaliados na randomização (V1), bem como no sexto (V2) e no décimo segundo mês (V3). Comparadas as médias da PA pela medida casual, pela AMPA e pela monitorização ambulatorial da pressão arterial (MAPA), exames laboratoriais e as respostas ao questionário sobre o estilo de vida. Os aparelhos utilizados foram: OMRON HEM 714, para a AMPA; OMRON 705 CP, para a medida casual; e Monitor SPACELABS 9002, para a MAPA. RESULTADOS: A idade média em anos foi de 62,05 ± 10,78 e de 55,42 ± 11,87 no GE e no GC (p = 0,03), respectivamente. Os valores da pressão arterial sistólica (PAS) pela medida casual no GE e no GC foram: 140,01 ± 16,73 mmHg e 141,79 ± 23,21 mmHg em V1 (p = 0,72); 135,49 ± 12,73 mmHg e 145,69 ± 19,31 mmHg em V2 (p = 0,02); 131,64 ± 19,28 mmHg e 134,88 ± 23,21 mmHg em V3 (p = 0,59). Os valores da pressão arterial diastólica (PAD) foram: 84,13 ± 10,71 mmHg e 86,29 ± 10,35 mmHg em V1 (p = 0,47); 81,69 ± 10,88 mmHg e 89,61 ± 11,58 mmHg em V2 (p = 0,02); 80,31 ± 11,83 mmHg e 86 ± 13,38 mmHg em V3 (p = 0,12). CONCLUSÃO: Os pacientes do GE apresentaram adesão ao tratamento não farmacológico semelhante ao GC, mas tiveram maior adesão ao tratamento medicamentoso e utilizaram menor número de drogas anti-hipertensivas. Não houve diferença entre os grupos na comparação do perfil metabólico e da função renal. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0).

BACKGROUND: The measurement of blood pressure (BP) by the patient himself without strict protocols, adequate training, and validated equipment at their own household is defined as self measured blood pressure (SMBP). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interference of the SMBP in treatment adherence and blood pressure control. METHODS: The study included 57 patients, 38 in the study group (SG) and 19 in the control group (CG). These patients were followed for 12 months and assessed at randomization (V1) as well as in the sixth (V2) and the twelfth month (V3). Compare the mean blood pressure by casual measurement, by SMBP and by ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure (AMBP), laboratory tests and the answers to the questionnaire on lifestyle. The instruments used were: OMRON HEM 714, for SMBP; OMRON 705 CP, for the casual measurement, and Monitor SPACELABS 9002 for the AMBP. RESULTS: The average age was 62.05 ± 10.78 in the SG and 55.42 ± 11.87 in the CG (p = 0.03). The values of systolic blood pressure (SBP) by casual measurement in the SG and CG were: 140.01 ± 16.73 mmHg and 141.79 ± 23.21 mmHg in V1 (p = 0.72), 135.49 ± 12.73 mmHg and 145.69 ± 19.31 mmHg in V2 (p = 0.02), 131.64 ± 19.28 mmHg and 134.88 ± 23.21 mmHg at V3 (p = 0.59). The values of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were: 84.13 ± 10.71 mmHg and 86.29 ± 10.35 mmHg in V1 (p = 0.47), 81.69 ± 10.88 mmHg and 89.61 V2 ± 11.58 mmHg (p = 0.02), 80.31 ± 11.83 mmHg and 86 ± 13.38 mmHg in V3 (p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Patients in the SG had adherence to non-pharmacological treatment similar to the CG, but they had greater adherence to drug treatment and used fewer antihypertensive drugs. There was no difference between groups when comparing the metabolic profile and renal function. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0).

Self measurement of blood pressure for control of blood pressure levels and adherence to treatment.

BACKGROUND: The measurement of blood pressure (BP) by the patient himself without strict protocols, adequate training, and validated equipment at their own household is defined as self measured blood pressure (SMBP). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interference of the SMBP in treatment adherence and blood pressure control. METHODS: The study included 57 patients, 38 in the study group (SG) and 19 in the control group (CG). These patients were followed for 12 months and assessed at randomization (V1) as well as in the sixth (V2) and the twelfth month (V3). Compare the mean blood pressure by casual measurement, by SMBP and by ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure (AMBP), laboratory tests and the answers to the questionnaire on lifestyle. The instruments used were: OMRON HEM 714, for SMBP; OMRON 705 CP, for the casual measurement, and Monitor SPACELABS 9002 for the AMBP. RESULTS: The average age was 62.05 ± 10.78 in the SG and 55.42 ± 11.87 in the CG (p = 0.03). The values of systolic blood pressure (SBP) by casual measurement in the SG and CG were: 140.01 ± 16.73 mmHg and 141.79 ± 23.21 mmHg in V1 (p = 0.72), 135.49 ± 12.73 mmHg and 145.69 ± 19.31 mmHg in V2 (p = 0.02), 131.64 ± 19.28 mmHg and 134.88 ± 23.21 mmHg at V3 (p = 0.59). The values of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were: 84.13 ± 10.71 mmHg and 86.29 ± 10.35 mmHg in V1 (p = 0.47), 81.69 ± 10.88 mmHg and 89.61 V2 ± 11.58 mmHg (p = 0.02), 80.31 ± 11.83 mmHg and 86 ± 13.38 mmHg in V3 (p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Patients in the SG had adherence to non-pharmacological treatment similar to the CG, but they had greater adherence to drug treatment and used fewer antihypertensive drugs. There was no difference between groups when comparing the metabolic profile and renal function.

Comparação e correlação entre automedida, medida casual e monitorização ambulatorial da pressão arterial / Comparison and correlation between self-measured blood pressure, casual blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring / Comparación y correlación entre automedida, medida casual y monitorización ambulatoria de la presión arterial

FUNDAMENTO: A medida casual da pressão arterial (PA) pelos profissionais de saúde está sujeita a uma grande variabilidade, sendo necessário buscar novos métodos que possam superar essa limitação. OBJETIVO: Comparar e avaliar a correlação entre os níveis de PA obtidos por meio da automedida da pressão arterial (AMPA) com a medida casual e com a monitorização ambulatorial da pressão arterial (MAPA). MÉTODOS: Avaliamos hipertensos que realizaram as três metodologias de medida da PA com intervalo menor que 30 dias; as médias das pressões foram utilizadas para comparação e correlação. Foram empregados os aparelhos: OMRON 705 CP (medida casual), OMRON HEM 714 (AMPA) e SPACELABS 9002 (MAPA). RESULTADOS: Foram avaliados 32 pacientes, 50,09 por cento mulheres, idade média 59,7 (± 11,2) anos, média do IMC 26,04 (± 3,3) kg/m². Valores médios de pressão sistólica (PAS) e pressão diastólica (PAD) para a AMPA foram de 134 (± 15,71)mmHg e 79,32 (± 12,38) mmHg. Na medida casual as médias da PAS e PAD foram, respectivamente, 140,84 (± 16,15)mmHg e 85 (± 9,68) mmHg. Os valores médios da MAPA na vigília foram 130,47 (± 13,26) mmHg e 79,84 (± 9,82) mmHg para PAS e PAD, respectivamente. Na análise comparativa, a AMPA apresentou valores semelhantes aos da MAPA (p > 0,05) e diferentes da medida casual (p < 0,05). Na análise de correlação a AMPA foi superior à medida casual, considerando a MAPA como o padrão de referência nas medidas tensionais. CONCLUSÃO: A AMPA apresentou melhor comparação com a MAPA do que a medida casual e também se correlacionou melhor com a aquela, especialmente para a pressão diastólica, devendo ser considerada uma alternativa com baixo custo para o acompanhamento do paciente hipertenso.

BACKGROUND: Casual blood pressure (BP) measurement by healthcare professionals is subject to great variability and new methods are necessary to overcome this limitation. OBJECTIVE: To compare and assess the correlation between the BP levels obtained by self-measured BP (SMBP), casual BP measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: We assessed hypertensive individuals submitted to the three methods of BP measurement at an interval < 30 days; the BP means were used for comparison and correlation. The following devices were used: OMRON 705 CP (casual measurement), OMRON HEM 714 (SMBP) and SPACELABS 9002 (ABPM). RESULTS: A total of 32 patients were assessed, of which 50.09 percent were females, with a mean age of 59.7 (± 11.2), BMI mean of 26.04 (± 3.3) kg/m². Mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for SMBP were 134 (± 15.71) mmHg and 79.32 (± 12.38) mmHg. The casual measurement means of SBP and DBP were, respectively, 140.84 (± 16.15) mmHg and 85 (± 9.68) mmHg. The mean values of ABPM during the wakefulness period were 130.47 (± 13.26) mmHg and 79.84 (± 9.82) mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. At the comparative analysis, the SMBP had similar results to those obtained at ABPM (p > 0.05) and different from the casual measurement (p < 0.05). At the analysis of correlation, SMBP values were higher than the casual measurements, considering ABPM as the reference standard in BP measurements. CONCLUSION: SMBP showed a better correlation with ABPM than the casual measurement and was also better correlated with the latter, especially regarding the DBP and should be considered as a low-cost alternative for the follow-up of the hypertensive patient.

FUNDAMENTO: La medida casual de la presión arterial (PA), por los profesionales de la salud está sujeta a una gran variabilidad, siendo necesario buscar nuevos métodos que puedan superar esa limitación. OBJETIVO: Comparar y evaluar la correlación entre los niveles de PA obtenidos por medio de la automedida de la presión arterial (AMPA) con la medida casual y con la monitorización ambulatoria de la presión arterial (MAPA). MÉTODOS: Evaluamos hipertensos que realizaron las tres metodologías de medida de la PA con un intervalo menor que 30 días. Los promedios de las presiones fueron utilizados para la comparación y la correlación. Fueron usados los aparatos: OMRON 705 CP (medida casual), OMRON HEM 714 (AMPA) y SPACELABS 9002 (MAPA). RESULTADOS: Se evaluaron 32 pacientes, 50,09 por ciento mujeres, edad promedio 59,7(± 11,2) años, promedio del IMC 26,04 (± 3,3) kg/m². Los valores promedios de presión sistólica (PAS) y presión diastólica (PAD) para la AMPA fueron de 134 (± 15,71) mmHg y 79,32(± 12,38) mmHg. En la medida casual los promedios de la PAS y PAD fueron, respectivamente, 140,84 (± 16,15) mmHg y 85 (± 9,68) mmHg. Los valores promedios de la MAPA en la vigilia fueron 130,47 (± 13,26) mmHg y 79,84 (± 9,82) mmHg para PAS y PAD, respectivamente. En el análisis comparativo, la AMPA tuvo valores similares a los de la MAPA (p > 0,05) y diferentes de la medida casual (p < 0,05). En el análisis de correlación la AMPA fue superior a la medida casual, considerando la MAPA como el estándar de referencia en las medidas tensionales. CONCLUSIÓN: La AMPA presentó una mejor comparación con la MAPA que la medida casual y también se correlacionó mejor con aquella, especialmente para la presión diastólica, debiendo ser considerada como una alternativa con bajo coste para el seguimiento del paciente hipertenso.

Comparison and correlation between self-measured blood pressure, casual blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Casual blood pressure (BP) measurement by healthcare professionals is subject to great variability and new methods are necessary to overcome this limitation. OBJECTIVE: To compare and assess the correlation between the BP levels obtained by self-measured BP (SMBP), casual BP measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: We assessed hypertensive individuals submitted to the three methods of BP measurement at an interval < 30 days; the BP means were used for comparison and correlation. The following devices were used: OMRON 705 CP (casual measurement), OMRON HEM 714 (SMBP) and SPACELABS 9002 (ABPM). RESULTS: A total of 32 patients were assessed, of which 50.09% were females, with a mean age of 59.7 (± 11.2), BMI mean of 26.04 (± 3.3) kg/m(2). Mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for SMBP were 134 (± 15.71) mmHg and 79.32 (± 12.38) mmHg. The casual measurement means of SBP and DBP were, respectively, 140.84 (± 16.15) mmHg and 85 (± 9.68) mmHg. The mean values of ABPM during the wakefulness period were 130.47 (± 13.26) mmHg and 79.84 (± 9.82) mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. At the comparative analysis, the SMBP had similar results to those obtained at ABPM (p > 0.05) and different from the casual measurement (p < 0.05). At the analysis of correlation, SMBP values were higher than the casual measurements, considering ABPM as the reference standard in BP measurements. CONCLUSION: SMBP showed a better correlation with ABPM than the casual measurement and was also better correlated with the latter, especially regarding the DBP and should be considered as a low-cost alternative for the follow-up of the hypertensive patient.