• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Factors associated with change in frailty scores and long-term outcomes in older adults with coronary artery disease

    2021-04-30 09:20:52MichaelGharacholouJoshuaSlusserRyanLennonCarolynFlockLeslieCooperPatriciaPellikkaJorgeBrenesSalazarMandeepSingh
    Journal of Geriatric Cardiology 2021年3期

    S. Michael Gharacholou?, Joshua P. Slusser, Ryan J. Lennon, Carolyn R. Flock,Leslie T. Cooper, Patricia A. Pellikka, Jorge Brenes Salazar, Mandeep Singh

    1. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA; 2. Department of Cardiology, Mayo Health System, La Crosse, WI, USA; 3. Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 4. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE Older adults with coronary artery disease (CAD) are at risk for frailty. However, little is known regarding transition in frailty measures over time or its impact on outcomes. We sought to determine the association of temporal change in frailty with long-term outcome in older adults with CAD. METHODS We re-assessed for phenotypic frailty using the Fried index (0=not frail; 1-2=pre-frail; ≥ 3 frail) in a cohort of CAD patients ≥ 65 years old at 2 time points 5 years apart. Factors associated with frailty worsening were assessed with scatterplots and outcomes estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox models were used to assess the risk of worsening frailty on outcome. RESULTS There were 45 subjects that completed both baseline and 5-year Fried frailty assessment. Mean age was 74.6 ± 5.9 and 30 (67%) were men. Frailty incidence increased over time: baseline (3% frail, 37% pre-frail); 5 years (10% frail, 40% pre-frail).Baseline factors were not predictors of worsening frailty score, while both slower walk time (r=0.46; P=0.004) and diminishing grip strength (r=-0.39; P=0.01) were associated with worsening frailty transitions. In follow-up (median 5.2 years), long-term major adverse cardiac event (MACE) free survival (P=0.12) or hospitalization (P=0.98) was not different for those with worsening frailty score (referent: improved/unchanged frailty). Frailty worsening had a trend towards increased risk of MACE (HR =1.86; 95% CI: 0.65-5.27, P=0.25). CONCLUSIONS Frailty transitions, specifically, declines in walk time and grip strength, were strongly associated with worsening frailty score in a cohort of older adults with CAD than were baseline indices, though frailty change status was not independently associated with MACE outcomes.

    The geriatric syndrome of frailty is characterized by diminished resilience to physiologic stressors due, in part, to vulnerability in health reserves. It is postulated that the diminished homeostatic reserves place the susceptible older adult at increased risk for loss of independence, increased health utilization, diminished quality of life, and disability.[1]Frailty is not a binary phenomenon, but rather a continuum of functional and physiologic factors, such that even early elements of frailty have been shown to be associated with higher rates of cardiovascular events.[2]Although increasing age has been associated with frail features, ageper sedoes not define frailty and differences between normal physiologic aging and frailty have distinct biological underpinnings.[3]Despite the variability in definitions for frailty across studies,[4-6]the phenotype of frailty has been associated with adverse outcomes in communitydwelling populations[7]and in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).[8-10]A limitation of prior studies evaluating the relationship between frailty and outcomes has been measurement of frailty only as an exposure variable at baseline,[7,11]rather than evaluating how frailty features may change over time. The factors associated with incident frailty, or development of new frail features over time, is less understood and may potentially be identified as a target for intervention. In addition, identification of factors that have a protective effect (i.e., fewer frailty features over time) may also have important implications for management. Finally, the trajectory of change in frailty status has not been studied with respect to its association with important clinical outcomes.

    In this study, our objective was to determine which frailty factors change over time to better characterize the frailty phenotype, given that frail features are neither static nor binary variables. To accomplish this, we re-measured frailty features in community dwelling patients with known CAD that had participated in an initial frailty prevalence study several years prior. By utilizing a 2ndwave assessment, we were uniquely able to study not only the relationship between baseline characteristics and frailty change status, but correlate change in frailty indices over time with long-term outcomes.

    METHODS

    Patient Population

    This study received approval from the Institutional Review Board of the Mayo Clinic. Patients 65 years or older with a history of CAD, defined as a prior history of percutaneous or surgical coronary artery revascularization, prior myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia on prior functional study, or ≥50% stenosis in an epicardial vessel at invasive angiography, were prospectively enrolled in an observational study evaluating functional status, frailty,and sarcopenia at Mayo Clinic Health System-Franciscan Healthcare in La Crosse, WI (USA) from 2008 through 2012. Patients with residual neurological deficits after a stroke, severe Parkinson's disease, or dementia were excluded from the study given the concern regarding validity of functional assessments in these patients. Baseline demographic and functional characteristics were collected as part of an initial (1stwave) observational study, which included assessment of the frailty phenotype by trained personnel. We used the 5-component Fried frailty score which included assessment for unintended weight loss (>10 lb in the preceding year),physical activity, exhaustion, gait speed (walking time over 15 feet), and grip strength.[4]Physical activity was measured by the short version of the Minnesota Leisure Time Activity questionnaire.Low physical activity was defined as < 383 Kcal/week for men and < 270 Kcal/week for women. Exhaustion was measured by the Center of Epidemiologic Studies-Depression's subscale. The two items in this scale are: how often in the past week did the patient feel the following: (a) I felt that everything I did was an effort, and (b) I could not get going.Subjects who answered “a moderate amount of time (3-4 days)” or “most of the time” to either of the statements were categorized as meeting the exhaustion criteria for frailty. Gait speed was assessed as walking time across a 15-foot distance in an unobstructed, well-lit hallway. Participants walking with an assist device were permitted to do so for the test. Hand-grip strength was tested in the subject's dominant hand using a Jamar?handgrip dynamometer (Bolingbrook, IL). Participants were told to squeeze as hard as possible and results were scored as kilograms. Cutoffs for values that constituted abnormal frailty measures are reported (Supplementary Table 1). A patient was defined as frail if they were found to have deficits in three or more core elements, pre-frail if they had deficits in 1-2 core elements, or non-frail if no deficits were identified.[4]In 2015, patients originally participating in the 1stwave study were contacted by mail for an inperson re-assessment of frailty features, which was approximately 5 years after initial study participation, allowing for assessment in temporal change of the frailty phenotype. The Fried frailty domains were performed from 1/2015-12/2015 as part of the 2ndwave assessment, which occurred several years after the initial frailty assessment. Follow-up was performed through review of medical records for important clinical outcomes, including death,myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting(CABG), stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hospitalizations. A composite outcome of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) included all of the individual outcome components with the exception of hospitalization.

    Statistical Analysis

    Continuous variables were summarized as means ±SD and categorical variables were presented as frequencies (percentages). For ease in data interpretation, a “frailty worsening score” was developed to signify change in frailty from baseline (1stwave) to follow-up (2ndwave), where a positive score identified worsening frailty features while a negative score characterized fewer frailty features. Associations were tested with the frailty worsening score using scatterplots and using a trend test for binary variables and a correlation coefficient for continuous variables. Scatterplot smoothing lines were used for testing relationships between continuous variables. The occurrence of outcomes was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Individual comparisons of the Kaplan-Meier estimates were completed using the log-rank test. Univariate Cox proportional hazard models were constructed for outcomes of interest, adjusting for selected covariates. Based upon these results, multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were then constructed,adjusting first for age and gender, then for age,gender and worsening frailty, and finally adjusting for age, gender, worsening frailty and any other covariates with a univariateP-value ≤ 0.15. Statistical significance is defined as a 2-tailedPvalue of less than 0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS Version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

    RESULTS

    Table 1 Patient characteristics.

    From the original cohort of 144 patients participating in the baseline frailty assessment, 47 patients responded to the mailed contact letter, consented to study participation, and underwent in-person reassessment of frailty. Complete baseline data was unavailable in two subjects, leaving a final cohort of 45 patients. Baseline characteristics between patients that responded to the contact letter and those that did not return for frailty reassessment were similar(data not shown). Table 1 lists the demographic characteristics of the study cohort. There were high rates of cardiovascular risk factors among study participants, including hypertension (89%), hyperlipidemia (66%), and diabetes (23%). Characteristics of frailty features at baseline and follow-up are shown in Table 2. Few patients were frail at baseline,consistent with known low prevalence of frailty in community dwelling participants. However, reassessment for frailty features several years later demonstrated higher rates of exhaustion, weight loss, low physical activity, and slower walk time as compared to baseline. Physical activity was significantly lower at follow-up as compared to baseline (P=0.008). Frailty classifications showed fewer non-frail adults at follow-up with higher rates of pre-frail and frail phenotypes. Composite scores also confirmed accrual of frailty features as compared to baseline, with shifting of the frailty composite score towards greater deficits. There were 11 patients(28%) whose frailty classification worsened from baseline to follow-up, while only five patients (13%)had improvement.

    Table 2 Summary of frailty features and composite score: baseline to follow-up.

    Figure 1A and 1B shows that changes in walk time (i.e, slower walking time) and grip strength(i.e, poorer grip strength) over time were associated with worsening frailty status as assessed in follow-up, respectively. Both slower walk time (r=0.46;P=0.004) and decreased grip strength (r=-0.39;P=0.01) were associated with worsening frailty change score, while increase in BMI showed trend towards an improving frailty score but was not statistically significant (r=-0.26;P=0.11) (Figure 1C).Table 3 shows clinical events over long term followup by frailty change status. There was a trend toward higher rates of all clinical events, including death, MACE, and hospitalizations, in patients with worsening frailty status as compared to patients whose frailty status remained unchanged or had improved.

    Figure 2A shows the survival curve for MACE by frailty change status (improved/unchanged frailty vs. worsened frailty) over a median follow-up of 5.2 years. Although there was an observed trend toward worse survival free of MACE among those worsening frailty change status, it was not statistically significant (P=0.12 by log-rank). Hospitalization events over long-term follow-up were not different between frailty change status groups (Figure 2B).Factors independently associated with MACE were studied using a multivariable model (Supplementary Table 2). Frailty change status had nearly 2-fold increased risk of MACE, but did not reach significance (HR=1.86; 95% CI: 0.65-5.29). A history of hypertension was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE (HR=0.17; 95% CI: 0.04-0.65) while a history of heart failure was strongly associated with MACE (HR=4.10; 95% CI: 1.36-12.40).

    DISCUSSION

    In a cohort of older adults with CAD, repeat measures of frailty indices provided important information on frailty status change over time. Most Fried frailty features were more prevalent during 2ndwave assessments, though only decreased physical activity was significantly lower. Serial assessment demonstrated that nearly 1/3 (28%) of subjects show worsening frailty classification over followup. No baseline factors were associated with worsening frailty status at five years, however, declining walk time and grip strength identified worsening frailty classification over time. We observed a trend towards less frailty progression by increased BMI, which was not evident when only baseline BMI was considered. Despite higher crude rates of adverse outcomes in patients with worsening frailty vs. those with unchanged/improved frailty, MACE and hospitalization rates were not significantly different between groups. These observations suggest that baseline only assessments of frailty may be incomplete, and that functional,physiologic decline in older adults occurs across a continuum. Hallmarks of worsening frailty may be better identified by looking at change in walk time and grip strength rather than relying on their values at baseline alone.

    Newman,et al.[12]noted that baseline frailty,without subsequent re-measurement, was associated with markers of cardiovascular disease, such as heart failure and peripheral artery disease. A potential link between frailty and both manifest cardiovascular disease and biomarkers of CAD was felt to be related to chronic inflammation. Interestingly,the authors acknowledged that a key limitation of their findings related to only a baseline assessment of frailty criteria, rather than an understanding of changes to frailty features over time. A consensus work group on data elements and outcomes in frailty research has emphasized the need to better understand how commonly used frailty measures or instruments are sensitive to change, especially with respect to clinical outcomes.[13]In addition, the recognition that the phenotype of frailty reflects reduced intrinsic capacity over time, serial measurement of functional, physiologic, and vitality indices in older adults may further help define the continuum of frailty. Unfortunately, few studies published in the frailty space have re-assessed frailty indices over time in a cohort of community dwelling patients.

    Figure 1 Association calculations. (A): association between the change in walk time as assessed at baseline and follow-up time points and worsening frailty score (P=0.004). Longer walk times equated with slower gait speed and greater frailty deficit. (B): association between the change in grip strength as assessed at baseline and follow-up time points and worsening frailty score(P=0.01). The higher changed grip strength equated with grip strength improvement and fewer frailty deficits. (C): association between change in BMI and worsening frailty score. There was no significant relationship between change in BMI and worsening frailty score. BMI: body mass index.

    In our cohort, walk time at baseline was generally normal, with fewer than 7% classified as slow walkers. However, follow-up assessment of walk time demonstrated that the prevalence of slow walkers had increased by 2-fold (15%). In addition,baseline walk times did not correlate with frailty worsening scores; however, change in walk time was significantly associated with frailty worsening(r=0.46;P=0.004). This underscores the dynamic nature of mobility assessment in the geriatric population, suggesting that baseline cross-sectional type aging assessments have limitations. This observation also comports with clinical comprehensive geriatric assessment that often entails serial evaluations and re-measurement over time. Gait speed change, rather than baseline walk speed, has been used in different populations but rarely studied in patients with CAD. Gait speed decline in older adults has been associated with changes in brain volume and white matter hyperintensity on neuroimaging,[14]with cognition influencing gait speed change during physical reconditioning.[15]Improved gait speed change after first stroke was associated with improved walking ability as rated by therapists and subjects.[16]In a large prospective cohort study of community-dwelling elders, Duan-Porter,et al.[17]showed that hospitalization was associated with decreased gait speed and nearly 2-fold increased odds of new disability or new mobility limitation. Decline in serial gait speed may function as a barometer of cognitive and health reserves,and may identify a vulnerable population at risk for adverse outcomes. However, as suggested in post stroke recovery, walk time improvement may herald improved reserves, reconditioning, and functional resilience.

    Table 3 Long term outcomes by frailty change status.

    Figure 2 Survival free of MACE (A) and hospitalization (B) by frailty change score status over long-term follow-up. MACE: major adverse cardiac event.

    Baseline grip strength was not associated with frailty worsening score in our study, though change in grip strength was (r=-0.39;P=0.01). In a large cohort of adults ≥ 60 years old, a 1 kg improvement in grip strength over 1-year was associated with 13% lower mortality.[18]Similar observations have been noted over long-term follow-up among those ≥85 years old, with some suggestion that women with declining grip strength may be at greater mortality risk than men.[19]Declining grip strength change may also correlate with changes in skeletal health, bone loss, fracture risk, and other adverse health outcomes.[20,21]These data support serial assessment of grip strength as both a biomarker of functional abilities and identifier of vulnerability in older adults with geriatric syndromes. Intervention trials aimed at attenuating grip strength decline through strength training may have the added benefit of impacting the frailty phenotype. Given that lower grip strength has been associated with higher cardiovascular mortality,[22]the implications of declining grip strength in a CAD population deserves further study.

    Few studies have looked at frailty change and its relationship to outcome. Wang,et al.[23]used the Fried frailty index to show that both baseline frailty and a graded risk between frailty transition states were observed with respect to mortality. A study from the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey aimed to study transitions between frailty states and mortality.[24]In addition to noting worse survival among frailty change worsening status,these patients were also more likely to have greater suffering at end of life based on survey responses from next of kin. Similar to our study, both showed that frailty transitions were more likely to show frailty worsening than frailty improvement. Both studies highlight the dynamic process of change that occurs in the frailty phenotype and its association with outcome, underscoring that baseline indices incompletely characterize age-associated impairments and that frailty trajectory may provide additive information with respect to risk of adverse outcome.

    Our study adds to the literature by reporting frailty change over a 5-year period, followed by outcome assessment for another subsequent five years, representing one of the longest incident frailty studies to date. In addition, we studied MACE in addition to mortality which are relevant endpoints for patients with CAD. We identified that specific frailty components, namely functional performance with grip strength and gait speed, are responsible for the majority of transitions. The independent association of heart failure with MACE after accounting for demographics and frailty change status shows the prognostic significance of this comorbidity in older adults. This finding extends prior observations of the relationship between frail heart failure patients and outcome.[25]

    Limitations of our study included a modest sample size returning for the 2ndwave assessment,which likely affected our power to detect significant differences between frailty worsening status and MACE outcomes. Characteristics of responders vs non-responders in our study were similar, reducing potential for non-response bias. We defined frailty using the validated Fried index at both baseline and follow-up, though other forms of frailty assessment that are more streamlined, incorporate other features (i.e., cognition), and are, perhaps, less intensive have been used. Our study demonstrated that baseline assessments for Fried frailty classification change over time, with walk time and grip strength predominately affecting Fried frailty classification. An increase in BMI had a trend towards being mildly protective from worsening frailty. There was no baseline single-item measure correlated with worsening Fried frailty status at 5-year follow-up. Efforts to improve understanding of age-related impairments may be supplemented through repeated measures to evaluate change in phenotype over time. Baseline abnormalities for Fried indices are less indicative of frailty change over long term follow-up.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    This study was supported by Mayo Clinic Foundation for Education and Research.

    国产一区二区在线观看av| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 一级毛片 在线播放| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 乱人伦中国视频| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| av在线观看视频网站免费| 永久免费av网站大全| 自线自在国产av| 久久婷婷青草| 在线天堂中文资源库| av.在线天堂| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 国产麻豆69| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 大码成人一级视频| 久久午夜福利片| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 大香蕉久久成人网| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 观看美女的网站| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 18+在线观看网站| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 一级黄片播放器| h视频一区二区三区| 男女免费视频国产| 免费av中文字幕在线| 久久久久网色| 999精品在线视频| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 国产乱来视频区| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 成年av动漫网址| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 91成人精品电影| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 美女午夜性视频免费| 一个人免费看片子| 亚洲伊人色综图| 乱人伦中国视频| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 欧美+日韩+精品| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 欧美成人午夜精品| 国产在线视频一区二区| 精品一区二区免费观看| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 国产成人精品一,二区| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 黄色一级大片看看| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 精品久久久精品久久久| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 熟女电影av网| 国产男女内射视频| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲国产欧美网| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 国产成人精品无人区| 国产男女内射视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 亚洲国产看品久久| 久久免费观看电影| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 一级片'在线观看视频| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 美女大奶头黄色视频| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 欧美bdsm另类| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 少妇 在线观看| 亚洲国产精品999| 日本午夜av视频| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 久久狼人影院| 99香蕉大伊视频| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 国产精品三级大全| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 国产成人精品福利久久| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 久久这里只有精品19| 天天影视国产精品| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| av片东京热男人的天堂| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 曰老女人黄片| 欧美在线黄色| av网站免费在线观看视频| 少妇的丰满在线观看| xxx大片免费视频| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 久久久久国产网址| 精品国产一区二区久久| 搡老乐熟女国产| 午夜激情av网站| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| videosex国产| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 少妇的逼水好多| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 999精品在线视频| 欧美97在线视频| 国产av精品麻豆| 亚洲av男天堂| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 999久久久国产精品视频| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 久久青草综合色| 中文字幕制服av| 成人免费观看视频高清| av片东京热男人的天堂| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 多毛熟女@视频| 国产 精品1| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 1024视频免费在线观看| av天堂久久9| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 国产成人欧美| 1024香蕉在线观看| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 咕卡用的链子| 成年av动漫网址| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 综合色丁香网| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 九草在线视频观看| 七月丁香在线播放| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 久热这里只有精品99| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 国产一区二区在线观看av| av不卡在线播放| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 黄频高清免费视频| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 久久午夜福利片| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av | 日韩视频在线欧美| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| 国产1区2区3区精品| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 日韩av免费高清视频| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 日本91视频免费播放| 在线天堂最新版资源| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 久久久久精品性色| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 午夜福利,免费看| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 18禁观看日本| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 久久久国产一区二区| 免费看av在线观看网站| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 国产在视频线精品| 91成人精品电影| a级毛片在线看网站| 777米奇影视久久| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 18+在线观看网站| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 香蕉丝袜av| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 久久久精品94久久精品| 久久久久久久国产电影| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 免费av中文字幕在线| 如何舔出高潮| 熟女电影av网| av天堂久久9| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影 | 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 久久免费观看电影| 久久青草综合色| 亚洲伊人色综图| 电影成人av| 精品国产国语对白av| 久久久欧美国产精品| 男人操女人黄网站| 热re99久久国产66热| 成年动漫av网址| 国产精品成人在线| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 亚洲第一av免费看| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 国产成人91sexporn| 欧美成人午夜精品| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| av片东京热男人的天堂| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| av有码第一页| 色吧在线观看| 国产乱来视频区| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 日本色播在线视频| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 青草久久国产| 午夜福利视频精品| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 蜜桃在线观看..| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产在线免费精品| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 成人二区视频| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 深夜精品福利| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 久久久久精品性色| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| av有码第一页| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 伦精品一区二区三区| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 飞空精品影院首页| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 秋霞伦理黄片| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 搡老乐熟女国产| 午夜影院在线不卡| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 国产精品一国产av| 男女国产视频网站| 青春草视频在线免费观看| av免费观看日本| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 男女国产视频网站| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 成人国产麻豆网| 如何舔出高潮| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 国产成人aa在线观看| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 黄片播放在线免费| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 国产xxxxx性猛交| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 综合色丁香网| 日韩电影二区| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 亚洲精品视频女| 亚洲国产欧美网| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看 | 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 国产成人aa在线观看| 黄片小视频在线播放| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 国产亚洲最大av| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 性色avwww在线观看| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 777米奇影视久久| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看 | 大片免费播放器 马上看| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 人人澡人人妻人| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 亚洲av综合色区一区| 久久99精品国语久久久| 国产精品免费视频内射| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 久久人人爽人人片av| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区 | 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 五月开心婷婷网| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 欧美成人午夜精品| 男女边摸边吃奶| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 大香蕉久久网| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 久久久久久人人人人人| 香蕉国产在线看| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 欧美日韩av久久| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 秋霞伦理黄片| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 超色免费av| 99热全是精品| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 捣出白浆h1v1| 观看美女的网站| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 97在线视频观看| 日韩电影二区| av网站在线播放免费| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 成人国产麻豆网| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 亚洲内射少妇av| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 国产片内射在线| 免费看不卡的av| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看 | 精品午夜福利在线看| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 老熟女久久久| 国产精品无大码| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 在现免费观看毛片| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| www.av在线官网国产| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 午夜免费观看性视频| 久久久国产一区二区| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 国产亚洲最大av| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 一级片'在线观看视频| 一区福利在线观看| 欧美另类一区| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 久久久久久人妻| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 视频区图区小说| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 另类精品久久| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 制服人妻中文乱码| 亚洲第一青青草原| xxx大片免费视频| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 久久狼人影院| 久久影院123| 免费看不卡的av| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 久久久久久久久久久免费av| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 国产av码专区亚洲av| a级毛片黄视频| 大香蕉久久成人网| 婷婷成人精品国产| 99香蕉大伊视频| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 国产成人精品福利久久| av电影中文网址| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 超碰97精品在线观看| 观看av在线不卡| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 成人国语在线视频| 一区福利在线观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 色94色欧美一区二区| 美国免费a级毛片| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| av福利片在线| 亚洲伊人色综图| 高清av免费在线| 伦精品一区二区三区| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 永久免费av网站大全| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 久久久久久久精品精品| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 青草久久国产| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 国产av国产精品国产| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 精品午夜福利在线看| 18+在线观看网站| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 精品亚洲成国产av| 伦理电影免费视频| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 久热久热在线精品观看|