切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华危重症医学杂志(电子版)

中华危重症医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (03) : 192 -198. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2021.03.004

论著

联合应用二维斑点追踪和血管回声追踪技术预测高血压并发急性主动脉综合征发生的价值
冀加美1, 吴娟1, 顾文慧1, 裴勇凯1, 王艳丽1, 龚敏1, 武俊1,†()   
  1. 1. 116027　辽宁大连，大连医科大学附属第二医院超声科
  • 收稿日期:2020-12-06 出版日期:2021-06-30
  • 通信作者: 武俊
  • 基金资助:
    辽宁省自然科学基金面上项目(2019-MS-093)

Value of two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography and vascular echo tracking techniques in predicting the occurrence of hypertension complicated with acute aortic syndrome

Jiamei Ji1, Juan Wu1, Wenhui Gu1, Yongkai Pei1, Yanli Wang1, Min Gong1, Jun Wu1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, the Second Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, China
  • Received:2020-12-06 Published:2021-06-30
  • Corresponding author: Jun Wu
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

冀加美, 吴娟, 顾文慧, 裴勇凯, 王艳丽, 龚敏, 武俊. 联合应用二维斑点追踪和血管回声追踪技术预测高血压并发急性主动脉综合征发生的价值[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(03): 192-198.

Jiamei Ji, Juan Wu, Wenhui Gu, Yongkai Pei, Yanli Wang, Min Gong, Jun Wu. Value of two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography and vascular echo tracking techniques in predicting the occurrence of hypertension complicated with acute aortic syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2021, 14(03): 192-198.

目的

探讨联合应用二维斑点追踪和血管回声追踪技术在预测高血压并发急性主动脉综合征（AAS）发生中的价值。

方法

将2019年2月至2020年10月于大连医科大学附属第二医院进行诊治的50例高血压并发AAS患者纳入AAS组，另选取单纯性高血压患者50例作为HP组、健康志愿者50例作为对照组。比较3组患者的一般资料、升主动脉内径、升主动脉前壁纵向应变值（AW-LS）、升主动脉后壁纵向应变值（PW-LS）、颈总动脉收缩期最大内径（Dmax）及舒张期最小内径（Dmin）、颈总动脉内-中膜厚度（IMT）、颈总动脉僵硬度指数（β）及单点脉搏波传导速度（PWV β）。将体表面积、脉压差、升主动脉内径、AW-LS、PW-LS、Dmax、Dmin、IMT、β、PWV β纳入多因素Logistic回归分析，分析高血压并发AAS的独立危险因素；绘制受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线，并采用Z检验比较其曲线下面积（AUC）。

结果

对照组、HP组及AAS组患者体表面积[（1.76 ± 0.11）、（1.80 ± 0.18）、（1.85 ± 0.19）m2]、脉压差[（41 ± 8）、（61 ± 14）、（71 ± 16）mmHg]、升主动脉内径[（30.5 ± 3.0）、（35.1 ± 5.8）、（44.7 ± 7.8）mm]、AW-LS [（30 ± 5）%、（26 ± 8）%、（17 ± 5）%]、PW-LS [（32 ± 7）%、（31 ± 9）%、（22 ± 5）%]、Dmax [（7.4 ± 1.5）、（7.8 ± 1.3）、（8.7 ± 0.9）mm]、Dmin [（6.8 ± 1.0）、（7.4 ± 1.2）、（8.2 ± 0.9）mm]、IMT [（0.68 ± 0.26）、（1.25 ± 0.50）、（1.46 ± 0.50）mm]、β [（7.6 ± 1.7）、（10.0 ± 1.9）、（11.9 ± 3.5）]、PWV β [（6.5 ± 1.6）、（9.0 ± 1.5）、（10.0 ± 3.3）m / s]比较，差异均有统计学意义（F = 3.463、65.144、75.934、59.179、27.593、12.917、22.925、43.132、37.477、31.120，P均< 0.05）。多因素Logistic回归分析，结果显示，升主动脉内径[比值比（OR）= 1.247，95%置信区间（CI）（1.033，1.505），P = 0.021]和β [OR = 1.811，95%CI（1.180，2.778），P = 0.007]为高血压患者并发AAS的独立危险因素，而AW-LS [OR = 0.668，95%CI（0.526，0.848），P = 0.001]和PW-LS [OR = 0.661，95%CI（0.510，0.856），P = 0.002]是其保护因素。ROC曲线分析结果显示，升主动脉内径[AUC = 0.913，95%CI（0.867，0.960），P < 0.001]、AW-LS [AUC = 0.915，95%CI（0.869，0.961），P < 0.001]、PW-LS [AUC = 0.752，95%CI（0.674，0.830），P < 0.001]、β [AUC = 0.781，95%CI（0.699，0.862），P < 0.001]及四项联合[AUC = 0.983，95%CI（0.968，0.998），P < 0.001]均对高血压患者并发AAS具有预测价值，且四项联合的AUC均明显高于升主动脉内径（Z = 3.158，P = 0.002）、AW-LS（Z = 3.216，P = 0.001）、PW-LS（Z = 6.119，P < 0.001）和β（Z = 4.981，P < 0.001）。

结论

升主动脉内径、AW-LS、PW-LS和β是AAS发生的独立预测因子，四项指标联合时可提高其预测效能。

关键词: 急性主动脉综合征, 高血压, 二维斑点追踪, 回声追踪
Objective

To evaluate the value of two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography combining vascular echo tracking techniques in predicting the occurrence of hypertension complicated with acute aortic syndrome (AAS).

Methods

Fifty hypertensive patients complicated with AAS in the Second Hospital of Dalian Medical University from February 2019 to October 2020 were included into the AAS group. Fifty hypertensive patients without AAS were enrolled as the HP group and fifty healthy volunteers as the control group. The general indicators, ascending aortic diameter, ascending aortic anterior wall-longitudinal strain (AW-LS), ascending aortic posterior wall-longitudinal strain (PW-LS), common carotid artery systolic maximum diameter (Dmax), common carotid artery systolic minimum diameter (Dmin), common carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT), common carotid artery stiffness index (β) and single-point pulsed wave velocity (PWV β) were compared among these three groups. The body surface area, pulse pressure, ascending aortic diameter, AW-LS, PW-LS, Dmax, Dmin, IMT, β and PWV β were included in multivariate Logistic regression analysis and the independent risk factors of hypertension complicated with AAS were analyzed. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn, and the area under the curve (AUC) was compared by the Z-test.

Results

The body surface area [(1.76 ± 0.11), (1.80 ± 0.18), (1.85 ± 0.19) m2], pulse pressure [(41 ± 8), (61 ± 14), (71 ± 16) mmHg], ascending aortic diameter [(30.5 ± 3.0), (35.1 ± 5.8), (44.7 ± 7.8) mm], AW-LS [(30 ± 5)%, (26 ± 8)%, (17 ± 5)%], PW-LS [(32 ± 7)%, (31 ± 9)%, (22 ± 5)%], Dmax [(7.4 ± 1.5), (7.8 ± 1.3), (8.7 ± 0.9) mm], Dmin [(6.8 ± 1.0), (7.4 ± 1.2), (8.2 ± 0.9) mm], IMT [(0.68 ± 0.26), (1.25 ± 0.50), (1.46 ± 0.50) mm], β [(7.6 ± 1.7), (10.0 ± 1.9), (11.9 ± 3.5)], PWV β [(6.5 ± 1.6), (9.0 ± 1.5), (10.0 ± 3.3) m / s] in the control group, HP group and AAS group all showed significant differences (F = 3.463, 65.144, 75.934, 59.179, 27.593, 12.917, 22.925, 43.132, 37.477, 31.120; all P < 0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that the ascending aortic diameter [odds ratio (OR) = 1.247, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.033, 1.505), P = 0.021] and β [OR = 1.811, 95%CI (1.180, 2.778), P = 0.007] were independent risk factors for hypertensive patients complicated with AAS, while the AW-LS [OR = 0.668, 95%CI (0.526, 0.848), P = 0.001] and PW-LS [OR = 0.661, 95%CI (0.510, 0.856), P = 0.002] were protective factors. The ROC curve showed that the ascending aortic diameter [AUC = 0.913, 95%CI (0.867, 0.960), P < 0.001], AW-LS [AUC = 0.915, 95%CI (0.869, 0.961), P < 0.001], PW-LS [AUC = 0.752, 95%CI (0.674, 0.830), P < 0.001], β [AUC = 0.781, 95%CI (0.699, 0.862), P < 0.001] and the four joint items [AUC = 0.983, 95%CI (0.968, 0.998), P < 0.001] all have predictive value for hypertensive patients complicated with AAS. Moreover, the AUC of four joint items was significantly higher than that of the ascending aortic diameter (Z = 3.158, P = 0.002), AW-LS (Z = 3.216, P = 0.001), PW-LS (Z = 6.119, P < 0.001) and β (Z = 4.981, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The ascending aortic diameter, AW-LS, PW-LS and β are independent predictors for the occurrence of AAS in hypertensive patients. The predictive potential of AAS increases significantly when these four parameters are combined.

Key words: Acute aortic syndrome, Hypertension, Two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography, Echo-tracking
表1 3组患者一般资料比较（ ± s）
组别 例数 年龄（岁） 性别（例，男/女） 体表面积（m2） 脉压差（mmHg）
对照组 50 55 ± 5 28 / 22 1.76 ± 0.11 41 ± 8
HP组 50 59 ± 10 33 / 17 1.80 ± 0.18 61 ± 14a
AAS组 50 58 ± 12 36 / 14 1.85 ± 0.19a 71 ± 16ab
F / χ2值   2.078 2.859 3.463 65.144
P值   0.129 0.239 0.034 < 0.001
表2 3组患者升主动脉2D-STE及颈总动脉ET各指标比较（ ± s）
组别 例数 升主动脉内径（mm） AW-LS（%） PW-LS（%） Dmax（mm） Dmin（mm） IMT（mm） β PWV β（m / s）
对照组 50 30.5 ± 3.0 30 ± 5 32 ± 7 7.4 ± 1.5 6.8 ± 1.0 0.68 ± 0.26 7.6 ± 1.7 6.5 ± 1.6
HP组 50 35.1 ± 5.8a 26 ± 8a 31 ± 9 7.8 ± 1.3 7.4 ± 1.2a 1.25 ± 0.50a 10.0 ± 1.9a 9.0 ± 1.5a
AAS组 50 44.7 ± 7.8ab 17 ± 5ab 22 ± 5ab 8.7 ± 0.9ab 8.2 ± 0.9ab 1.46 ± 0.50ab 11.9 ± 3.5ab 10.0 ± 3.3ab
F值   75.934 59.179 27.593 12.917 22.925 43.132 37.477 31.120
P值   < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
表3 多因素Logistic回归分析高血压患者并发AAS的影响因素
影响因素 回归系数 标准误 Wald值 P值 OR值 95%CI
体表面积（m2） 1.211 3.104 0.152 0.696 3.358 0.008 ~ 1 471.828
脉压差（mmHg） 0.028 0.035 0.621 0.431 1.028 0.960 ~ 1.102
升主动脉内径（mm） 0.221 0.096 5.301 0.021 1.247 1.033 ~ 1.505
AW-LS（%） -0.404 0.122 10.972 0.001 0.668 0.526 ~ 0.848
PW-LS（%） -0.415 0.132 9.824 0.002 0.661 0.510 ~ 0.856
Dmax（mm） -5.532 4.006 1.906 0.167 0.004 0.000 ~ 10.182
Dmin（mm） 6.855 4.412 2.415 0.120 949.003 0.167 ~ 5 400 228.308
IMT（mm） 0.564 1.010 0.312 0.576 1.758 0.243 ~ 12.729
β 0.594 0.218 7.384 0.007 1.811 1.180 ~ 2.778
PWV β（m / s） 0.260 0.229 1.294 0.255 1.297 0.829 ~ 2.030
表4 ROC曲线分析升主动脉内径、AW-LS、PW-LS、β及四项联合对高血压患者并发AAS的预测价值
影响因素 AUC 标准误 P值 95%CI 敏感度（%） 特异度（%）
升主动脉内径（mm） 0.913 0.024 < 0.001 0.867 ~ 0.960 96.0 84.0
AW-LS（%） 0.915 0.023 < 0.001 0.869 ~ 0.961 90.0 85.0
PW-LS（%） 0.752 0.040 < 0.001 0.674 ~ 0.830 70.0 74.0
β 0.781 0.042 < 0.001 0.699 ~ 0.862 54.0 91.0
四项联合 0.983 0.008 < 0.001 0.968 ~ 0.998 96.0 90.0
图1 各指标诊断高血压并发AAS的ROC曲线分析
1
刘轶凡，董智慧，姜宝红，等. 急性主动脉综合征研究进展[J]. 中华外科杂志，2018,56(12):957-960.
2
陈志彦，徐明，高炜. 高血压血管重构的力学调控机制研究进展[J]. 生理科学进展，2017,48(1):77-80,后插1.
3
Shi Y, Zhu M, Chang Y, et al. The risk of stanford type-A aortic dissection with different tear size and location: a numerical study[J]. Biomed Eng Online, 2016, 15 (Suppl 2): 128.
4
王莺，吴琦，秦玲. 急性A型主动脉夹层急救的手术护理节点优化及策略 [J/CD]. 中华危重症医学杂志（电子版），2020,13(3):237-240.
5
国家基本公共卫生服务项目基层高血压管理办公室，基层高血压管理专家委员会. 国家基层高血压防治管理指南[J]. 中国循环杂志，2017,32(11):1041-1048.
6
王端，张扬春，王引利. 2014年欧洲心脏病学会主动脉疾病诊断及治疗指南（部分）[J]. 心血管病学进展，2014,35(5):617-621.
7
Bonaca MP, O'Gara PT. Diagnosis and management of acute aortic syndromes: dissection, intramural hematoma, and penetrating aortic ulcer[J]. Curr Cardiol Rep, 2014, 16 (10): 536.
8
Hagan PG, Nienaber CA, Isselbacher EM, et al. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease[J]. JAMA, 2000, 283 (7): 897-903.
9
Kaess BM, Rong J, Larson MG, et al. Aortic stiffness, blood pressure progression, and incident hypertension[J]. JAMA, 2012, 308 (9): 875-881.
10
Korneva A, Humphrey JD. Maladaptive aortic remode-ling in hypertension associates with dysfunctional smooth muscle contractility[J]. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2019, 316 (2): H265-H278.
11
Gu W, Wu J, Pei Y, et al. Evaluation of common c-arotid stiffness via echo tracking in hypertensive patients complicated by acute aortic dissection[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2021, 40 (5): 929-936.
12
Tarzamni MK, Eshraghi N, Fouladi RF, et al. Athe-rosclerotic changes in common carotid artery, common femoral artery, and ascending aorta / aortic arch in candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery[J]. Angiology, 2012, 63 (8): 622-629.
13
Wu Y, Xie M, Zhang L, et al. Carotid intima-media roughness and elasticity in hypertensive patients with normal carotid intima-media thickness[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2019, 38 (6): 1545-1552.
14
Nakashima Y, Kurozumi T, Sueishi K, et al. Dissect-ing aneurysm: a clinicopathologic and histopathologic study of 111 autopsied cases[J]. Hum Pathol, 1990, 21 (3): 291-296.
15
van Sloten TT, Schram MT, van den Hurk K, et al. Local stiffness of the carotid and femoral artery is associated with incident cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality: the Hoorn study[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2014, 63 (17): 1739-1747.
16
Tsamis A, Krawiec JT, Vorp DA. Elastin and collagen fibre microstructure of the human aorta in ageing and disease: a review[J]. J R Soc Interface, 2013, 10 (83): 20121004.
17
Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, et al. 2014 ESC g-uidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)[J]. Eur Heart J, 2014, 35 (41): 2873-2926.
18
Mansour AM, Peterss S, Zafar MA, et al. Prevention of aortic dissection suggests a diameter shift to a lower aortic size threshold for intervention[J]. Cardiology, 2018, 139 (3): 139-146.
19
葛伟东，任定远，李锋之，等. 二维斑点追踪成像技术对脓毒症患者左心功能的研究[J/CD]. 中华危重症医学杂志（电子版），2019,12(1):20-24.
20
Morrison TM, Choi G, Zarins CK, et al. Circumfer-ential and longitudinal cyclic strain of the human thoracic aorta: age-related changes[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2009, 49 (4): 1029-1036.
21
Oishi Y, Mizuguchi Y, Miyoshi H, et al. A novel a-pproach to assess aortic stiffness related to changes in aging using a two-dimensional strain imaging[J]. Echocardiography, 2008, 25 (9): 941-945.
22
Bieseviciene M, Vaskelyte JJ, Mizariene V, et al. Two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography for evaluation of dilative ascending aorta biomechanics[J]. BMC Cardiovasc Disord, 2017, 17 (1): 27.
23
Teixeira R, Monteiro R, Baptista R, et al. Aortic arch mechanics measured with two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography[J]. J Hypertens, 2017, 35 (7): 1402-1410.
24
Ahmed MK, Adam KF, El-Shafey WE. Assessment of aortic root mechanics in hypertensive patients by speckle tracking echocardiography[J]. World J Cardiovasc Dis, 2019, 9 (3): 212-222.
25
Mikael LR, Paiva AMG, Gomes MM, et al. Vascular aging and arterial stiffness[J]. Arq Bras Cardiol, 2017, 109 (3): 253-258.
[1] 刘丹妮, 敖梦, 冉海涛, 李世玉, 秦芳. 三维超声心动图及二维斑点追踪成像对持续性心房颤动复律后双心房逆向重构的评估[J]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2023, 20(08): 827-835.
[2] 陈丹丹, 马小静, 夏娟, 余正春, 谢姝瑞, 程冠, 吴梅. 二维斑点追踪成像技术对肥厚型心肌病患者右心室功能的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2023, 20(04): 417-423.
[3] 靳茜雅, 黄晓松, 谭诚, 蒋琴, 侯昉, 李瑶悦, 徐冰, 贾红慧, 刘文英. 产前他克莫司治疗对先天性膈疝大鼠病理模型肺血管重构的影响[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 428-436.
[4] 李建美, 邓静娟, 杨倩. 两种术式联合治疗肝癌合并肝硬化门静脉高压的安全性及随访评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 41-44.
[5] 王昆, 潘迪, 王庆, 江克华, 孙发. 机器人手术治疗膀胱副神经节瘤一例报告[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 291-292.
[6] 张其坤, 商福超, 李琪, 栗光明, 王孟龙. 联合脾切除对肝癌合并门静脉高压症患者根治性切除术后的生存获益分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 613-618.
[7] 许语阳, 吕云福, 王葆春. 乙肝后肝硬化门静脉高压症脾肿大外科治疗进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 469-473.
[8] 赫嵘, 贾哲, 张珂, 李代京, 张萌, 蒋力. 基于PSM分析腹腔镜肝切除联合Hassab术治疗合并门静脉高压症肝癌疗效[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 376-383.
[9] 杨林青, 任松, 纪泛扑, 张健, 蒋安, 张丽, 安鹏, 王林, 李宗芳. 揿针疗法对门静脉高压症脾切除断流术后胃肠功能的调节作用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 322-326.
[10] 任国华, 杜晓晓, 洪善玲, 邵帅. 妊娠期高血压并发急性肾损伤患者血清白细胞介素-22、硫化氢及护骨素水平的变化与意义[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 150-155.
[11] 李晓晨, 乔晞. 血液透析患者的血压靶目标值研究进展[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 168-171.
[12] 运陌, 李茂芳, 王浩, 刘东远. 微创穿刺引流联合吡拉西坦、乌拉地尔治疗基底节区高血压性脑出血的临床研究[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 278-285.
[13] 刘政委, 仪立志, 尹夕龙, 孔文龙, 纠智松, 张文源. 锥颅血肿外引流与神经内镜手术治疗老年基底节区高血压性脑出血的疗效分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 299-303.
[14] 许秀兰, 朱建建. 血压变异性与伴H型高血压的急性脑梗死患者预后不良的临床关系分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 199-204.
[15] 薛念余, 张盛敏, 吴凌恒, 沙蕾, 童揽月, 沈崔琴, 李朝军, 杜联芳. 研究血清胆红素对2型糖尿病患者心脏结构发生改变前心肌功能的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 1004-1009.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号