王瑞, 秦超师, 刘静, 崔洁, 赵连友, 牛晓琳. 基因指导降压药物选择与传统用药疗效比较[J]. 心脏杂志, 2021, 33(2): 133-137. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202103098
    引用本文: 王瑞, 秦超师, 刘静, 崔洁, 赵连友, 牛晓琳. 基因指导降压药物选择与传统用药疗效比较[J]. 心脏杂志, 2021, 33(2): 133-137. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202103098
    shu
    Rui WANG, Chao-shi QIN, Jing LIU, Jie CUI, Lian-you ZHAO, Xiao-lin NIU. Comparison of efficacy of antihypertensive durgs between choosing by gene testing and clinical experiences[J]. Chinese Heart Journal, 2021, 33(2): 133-137. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202103098
    Citation: Rui WANG, Chao-shi QIN, Jing LIU, Jie CUI, Lian-you ZHAO, Xiao-lin NIU. Comparison of efficacy of antihypertensive durgs between choosing by gene testing and clinical experiences[J]. Chinese Heart Journal, 2021, 33(2): 133-137. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202103098
    shu

    基因指导降压药物选择与传统用药疗效比较

    Comparison of efficacy of antihypertensive durgs between choosing by gene testing and clinical experiences

      摘要
    • 摘要:
        目的  比较原发性高血压患者在基因检测指导下选择降压药物与传统经验用药的临床疗效。
        方法  选取2019年08月至 2020年08月在唐都医院心内科门诊就诊的166例原发性高血压患者，根据是否在基因检测结果指导下选择降压药物分为基因指导组57例与非基因指导组109例。随访并收集患者的基本资料、用药前后的血压水平、用药种数以及药物的不良反应等资料，应用统计学方法分析两组患者降压疗效和不良反应的差异。
        结果  基因指导组用药后6周的血压达标率高于非基因指导组（P<0.05），基因指导组的血压达标天数小于非基因指导组（P<0.05）；药物不良反应的差异无统计学意义。在1、2级高血压中，基因指导组的血压达标天数小于非基因指导组（P<0.05）；药物不良反应的差异无统计学意义。在3级高血压中，用药后2、4、6周收缩压、舒张压的降低值和达标率方面，基因指导组均高于非基因指导组，达标天数方面基因指导组小于非基因指导组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；药物不良反应的差异无统计学意义。
        结论  与传统临床经验用药相比，在基因检测指导下选择降压药物患者能更有效，更早期控制血压；而药物的不良反应未见明显差异。

       

      Abstract:
        AIM  Compare the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs guided by gene testing results and doctor′s clinical experiences in patients with primary hypertension.
        METHODS  A total of 166 hypertension patients were enrolled from August 2019 to August 2020 in Tangdu Hospital.According to whether the antihypertensive drugs were selected by gene testing results, the study population was divided into the genetic guided group (57 cases) and the non-genetic guided group (109 cases).Basic data of patients, blood pressure before and after taking drugs, the number of drugs and adverse drug reactions were followed up and recorded.The differences of clinical efficacy between the two groups were analyzed by statistical methods.
        RESULTS  The control rate of blood pressure in the genetic guided group was significantly higher than that in the non-genetic guided group (P < 0.05), and the time to reach target blood pressure of the genetic guided group was less than that of the non-genetic guided group (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in adverse drug reactions.With grade 1 and 2 hypertension, the time to reach target blood pressure of the genetic guided group was less than that of the non-genetic guided group (P < 0.05).There was no statistical difference in adverse drug reactions.With grade 3 hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure reduction values in the second, fourth and sixth week after taking drugs and control rate of the genetic guided group were higher than that of the non-genetic guided group.Also the time to reach target blood pressure of the genetic guided group was less than that of the non-genetic guided group, the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).There was no statistical difference in adverse drug reactions.
        CONCLUSION  Compared with doctor’s clinical experiences, medication under the guidance of genetic testing results is more effective and more advanced in controlling blood pressure.And there is no significant difference between the two groups in adverse drug reactions.

       

      • HTML全文
      • 参考文献(10)
      • 相关文章
      • 施引文献
    • 资源附件(0)

    /

    返回文章
    返回