4.7 Article

Markers of inflammation and infection influence the outcome of patients with baseline asymptomatic carotid lesions - A 5-year follow-up study

Journal

STROKE
Volume 37, Issue 2, Pages 482-486

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000198813.56398.14

Keywords

atherosclerosis; carotid arteries; infection; inflammation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose - It is still in debate whether the evaluation of markers of infection and inflammation may be of importance for cerebrovascular and cardiovascular prevention, and we aimed to investigate this field in a prospective 5-year clinical follow-up study in patients with early stages of atherosclerosis. Methods - We studied 668 subjects divided in 3 groups according to the results of carotid ultrasound examination: (1) normal subjects, if intima-media thickness (IMT) was <0.9 mm; (2) with IMT, if IMT was between 0.9 and 1.5 mm; and (3) with asymptomatic carotid plaque, if IMT was >1.5 mm. Traditional cardiovascular risk factors were investigated, and laboratory analysis included measurement of plasma lipids, fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, IgG antibodies for helicobacter pylori (HP), cytotoxic HP, cytomegalovirus, and chlamydia pneumoniae. Results - Cerebrovascular or cardiovascular events were registered in 18% of patients during the follow-up, and at multivariate analysis we found that the high levels of fibrinogen (P < 0.0001) and C-reactive protein (P = 0.014), the seropositivity to cytotoxic HP (P = 0.001) and chlamydia pneumoniae (P = 0.026), the presence of IMT or asymptomatic carotid plaque (P < 0.0001), and the total burden of infections (P < 0.0001) were the variables predictive of the clinical events. Conclusions - Beyond traditional cardiovascular risk factors, markers of inflammation and infections seem to significantly influence the occurrence of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events in patients with baseline asymptomatic carotid lesions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available