Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J Ribstein

Publications and source records attributed to J Ribstein.

128 records · Page 8Linked to original sources

[I/D gene polymorphism of the angiotensin-converting enzyme and left ventricular hypertrophy. Response to converting enzyme inhibitors].

BACKGROUND: The present study was designed to assess whether the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene I/D polymorphism influence the ACE inhibitors effect on the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. METHODS: Sixty hypertensive subjects never treated by antihypertensive drugs, aged 46 +/- 11 years, were included in the study. Follow-up with ACE inhibitor treatment was 60 +/- 26 months. Genotypes for ACE I/D polymorphism (DD, ID or II) were determined by PCR. The left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was assessed by two-dimensional directed M-mode echocardiography. RESULTS: ACE genotype distribution was in agreement with the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium: 21 patients had the DD genotype, 29 were ID, and 10 were II. At baseline, age, systolic arterial pressure and LVMI didn't differ on the basis of genotype. Body mass index was significantly higher in II than in ID and DD groups. Regression of LVMI with ACE inhibitor treatment was similar in the 3 genotypes (-8.9%, -0.6%, -12.1% in DD, ID and II groups respectively). In addition, decrease of systolic arterial pressure was identical in 3 groups. CONCLUSION: ACE gene I/D polymorphism seems not to influence regression of left ventricular hypertrophy by ACE inhibitors in essential hypertension.

Adult↗

[Is masked hypertension an artefact due to the blood pressure measurement method and threshold effects?].

UNLABELLED: From results of office and home measurements of blood pressure (BP), patients can be classified as "hypertensive (HT)", "normotensive (NT)", "office hypertensive (OH)" or "masked hypertensive (MH)" by crossing the classifications obtained from each method. It seems that 9 to 20% of patients could be MH with a prognosis close to HT (SHEAF study). OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that at least one part of the prevalence of MH would be an artefact due to the difference between the methods of measurements (shygmomanometer vs semi-automatic device) and/or due to different definitions of office hypertension (OHT). To determine the impact of different definitions of OHT on the prevalence of MH. METHODS: During the course of a phase IV study, BP was measured with the same semi-automatic device (OMRON 705CP) both at doctor's office (3 measurements at 1-minute intervals) and at home, by the patient himself (3 measurements in the morning and in the evening at 1-minute intervals over the 7 days before the visit). Following definitions were used: Office HT: SBP > or =140 mmHg, DBP > or =90 mmHg, SBP > or =140 mmHg or DBP > or =90 mmHg; Home HT: SBP > or =135 mmHg, DBP> or =85 mmHg, SBP > or =135 mmHg or DBP > or =85 mmHg. Another definition of office HT was used SBP > or =135 mmHg, DBP > or =85 mmHg SBP > or =135 mmHg or DBP > or =85 mmHg. RESULTS: 575 patients were analysed. Results from the two methods of measurements are closed but significantly different (difference for SBP: 3.2 +/- 16.5 mmHg; p < 0.0001; difference for DBP: 1.4 +/- 10.3 mmHg; p = 0.002)

Aged↗