2006
DOI: 10.1097/00042752-200605000-00009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Twenty-Four Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring to Evaluate Effects on Blood Pressure of Physical Activity in Hypertensive Patients

Abstract: This reduction, evaluated with Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM), confirms that physical exercise should be a part of lifestyle changes for the management of hypertension both in untreated hypertensive patients or high-risk subjects for hypertension, and also for hypertensive patients in association with pharmacological therapy.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
38
0
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
3
38
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus inflammation marker evaluation has in DFS multiple points of potential importance concerning a better evaluation and analysis of these crucial key points: (1) pathogenetic role in ulcers and their micro and macrovascular background; (2)possible link between inflammation state and adipo-metabolic axis; (3) predictive role towards foot complications such as ulcers incidence; (4) putative role as markers of gravity of wounds and ulcers in a diabetic foot; (5) association with cardiovascular co-morbidity (prevalent and incident) in subjects with DFS; (6) prognostic role towards ulcer healing; (7) strict association with peripheral artery comorbidity (PAD); and (8) pathogentic links with metabolic syndrome and NASH [93][94][95][96][97][98][99] . It explains that a strict and prospective inflammation marker evaluation could be useful in practical management of foot complications in diabetic subjects in every medical setting (Internal Medicine, Diabetology, Surgery, Orthopedics) to better evaluate a complex disease such as DFS in a multispecialistic management contest.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus inflammation marker evaluation has in DFS multiple points of potential importance concerning a better evaluation and analysis of these crucial key points: (1) pathogenetic role in ulcers and their micro and macrovascular background; (2)possible link between inflammation state and adipo-metabolic axis; (3) predictive role towards foot complications such as ulcers incidence; (4) putative role as markers of gravity of wounds and ulcers in a diabetic foot; (5) association with cardiovascular co-morbidity (prevalent and incident) in subjects with DFS; (6) prognostic role towards ulcer healing; (7) strict association with peripheral artery comorbidity (PAD); and (8) pathogentic links with metabolic syndrome and NASH [93][94][95][96][97][98][99] . It explains that a strict and prospective inflammation marker evaluation could be useful in practical management of foot complications in diabetic subjects in every medical setting (Internal Medicine, Diabetology, Surgery, Orthopedics) to better evaluate a complex disease such as DFS in a multispecialistic management contest.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the current knowledge, regular exercise is a nonpharmacological therapeutic modality that enhances endothelial function in subjects with cardiovascular risk factors, including hypercholesterolemia [255], hypertension [29,256], metabolic syndrome [257], and type 2 diabetes mellitus [24,258], and in patients with established CAD [259,260] and heart failure [27,28,261]. In a prospective clinical study with CAD patients, 4 weeks of intensive exercise training decreased the coronary artery vasoconstriction, in response to acetylcholine, by 54% [259].…”
Section: Part III -Effect Of Chronic Exercise Training On Inflammatormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the results demonstrate that in patients with hypertension, median SBP and DBP values were lowered due to physical training [13][14][15]. On the other hand, in some cases, physical training did not provide the expected hypotensive effect in patients with hypertension [16][17][18].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%