4.6 Article

Evaluation of the endothelial glycocalyx damage in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Journal

ATHEROSCLEROSIS
Volume 247, Issue -, Pages 184-188

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2016.02.023

Keywords

Endothelial glycocalyx; Syndecan-1; Acute coronary syndrome; Myocardial infarction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Endothelial glycocalyx (EG) is sugar-based cell-bound surface molecules linked to transmembrane proteins observed on the endothelial surface of the vessels. Damage to this structure causes an increase in platelet and leucocyte adhesion and shear stress in the vessel. We hypothesized a possible link between EG damage and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: We measured the syndecan-1 levels (a biomarker of EG damage) in 141 patients (99 men) with ACS and compared to those of 45 patients (24 men) with non-coronary chest pain (NCCP) and of 24 (14 men) healthy individuals (CONTROL). Results: The baseline characteristics of the ACS and NCCP groups were similar. Syndecan-1 levels were significantly higher in the ACS group than in the NCCP (p = 0.01) and CONTROL (p = 0.001) groups but did not differ between the NCCP and CONTROL groups (p = 0.83). In analysis according to gender category, the difference among the groups remained significant only for men (p = 0.0009). A syndecan-1 level higher than 148 ng/ml was associated with ACS diagnosis with an odds ratio of 14 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8 to 102), p = 0.011. After adjusting for gender, age and current or past tobacco use, this syndecan-1 level remained positively associated with ACS diagnosis with an odds ratio of 12 (95% CI: 1.6 to 93), p = 0.016. Conclusion: Higher syndecan-1 levels were observed during ACS, mostly in men, suggesting that EG damage could participate in the atherosclerotic plaque vulnerability process in these patients. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available