平均压力单位脉搏波速度初步分析

Preliminary Analysis with Mean Pressure Unit Pulse Wave Velocity

目的:提出平均压力单位脉搏波速度(Mean Pressure Unit Pulse Wave Velocity,MPUPWV)厘米/秒/平均每毫米汞柱(cm/s/mmHg)进行分析。材料与方法:以踝臂指数(Ankle-Brachial Index,ABI)1.0～1.3,血糖、血脂、血压正常范围者为对照组;ABI 0.90～<1.00,为观察1组;ABI<0.90为观察2组。PWV/PP(脉压)=MPUPWV。ABI成对相关系数为0.693,(P=0.000)故与本文相关的数据选择右侧进行处理。3组间均数用单因素方差分析与协方差分析,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:对照组、观察1组、观察2组,在AGE(年龄)、RBSYS(右上臂收缩压)、RBPP(右上臂脉压)依次逐组递增,且各组间对比均P<0.05。RA-SYS(右下肢收缩压)、RAPP(右下肢脉压)依次逐组递减且各组间对比均P<0.05。RBAPWV(右侧臂-踝脉搏波速度)、RHAPWV(右侧心-踝脉搏波速度)观察1组﹥观察2组﹥对照组,对照组与观察1组对比P<0.05;余下各组间对比,均P>0.05。RBAMPUPWV(右侧臂-踝平均压力单位脉搏波速度)、RHAMPUPWV(右侧心-踝平均压力单位脉搏波速度)依次逐组递增,除外RBAMPUP-WV观察1组与观察2组对比P>0.05,余下各组间对比,均P<0.05。当年龄在57.2岁时,RBAPWV、RHAPWV观察1组﹥对照组﹥观察2组,各组间对比,均P<0.05。RBAMPUPWV、RHAMPUPWV值的排序仍同年龄未校正时,只是RBAMPUPWV组间对比全部为P<0.05。RHAMPUPWV情况同年龄未校正时。结论:距离/时间=速度,这一力学物理量只表明物体在运动的现象,但不能阐明物体运动的内在原因-动力,因为动力与速度总是成正比,只有力的单位是统一的,不同的个体之间的速度才有可比性。平均压力单位脉搏波速度初步分析表明,ABI<0.90时PWV降低与血压降低,运用平均压力单位脉搏波速度进行分析比较,结论与传统认识正好相反,ABI<0.90的病例组平均压力单位脉搏波速度是最高的。保守的推论,ABI为0.90～<1.00的大多数病人至少存在下肢的动脉硬化。

Objective. To analyse to put forward mean pressure unit pulse wave velocity , MPUPWV （cm/s/mmHg）from thi paper. Methods. With Ankle-Brachial Index, ABI 1.00-1.3, blood sugar, blood fat, blood pressure were normal as control group;ABI 0. 90 -〈 1.00, to observe group 13 ABI 〈0. 90 to observe group 2. PWV/PP （pulse pressure） = MPUPWV. ABI pair correlation coefficient is 0. 693 （P= 0. 000）, so, relevant data on the right choice for processing. Among Three groups of mean with univariate analysis of variance and covariance analysis; P〈0. 05 for difference have statistical significance. Results. Control group and observation group 1, observe group 2, in AGE （AGE）, RBSYS （upper right arm systolic blood pressure）, RBPP （upper right arm pulse pressure） in turn by increasing group, and each group con- trasted, P〈0. 05. RBAMPUPWV （ right arm - ankle average pressure unit pulse wave velocity）, RHAMP- UPWV （ right heart - ankle average pressure unit pulse wave velocity） in turn by increasing group, except RBAMPUPWV observation group 1 and observation group 2 contrasted , P〉0. 05, the remaining each group contrasted, P〈0. 05. When age in 57. 2 years old, RBAPWV, RHAPWV observation group 1〉con- trol group〉 observe group 2, each group contrasted, P〈0. 05. RBAMPUPWV,RHAMPUPWV value sequence was as same as age not correction, just RBAPWVAPU contrasted among groups was all P〈0. 05.