4.5 Article

Relationship of a comprehensive panel of plasma oxidized low-density lipoprotein markers to angiographic restenosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina

Journal

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 150, Issue 5, Pages 1007-1014

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.12.008

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background This study was performed to assess the relationship between oxidized low-density lipoprotein (OxLDL) and restenosis. OxLDL induces up-regulation of inflammatory genes and cytokines and recruits monocytes to the vessel wall. Elevated levels of monocytes post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are associated with in-stent restenosis. Methods and Results One hundred forty-one patients with stable angina pectoris bad serial blood samples drawn before PCI (68% balloon only, 32% stent), immediately post-PCI and at 6 and 24 hours, 3 days, 1 week, and 1, 3, and 6 months. Plasma levels of OxLDL-E06, a measure of oxidized phospholipid (OxPL) content on opoB-100 detected by antibody E06 (OxPL/apoB), autoontibodies to malondialdehyde-LDL and copper-oxidized LDL, and apoB-immune complexes were measured in all samples. Quantitative and qualitative coronary angiography was performed with 94% angiographic follow-up. Restenosis was defined as >50% diameter stenosis (%DS). The overall angiographic restenosis rate was 32% (39% in balloon group, 16% in stent group). OxPL/apoB levels rose significantly and OxLDL autoantibody titers decreased immediately post-PCI in patients both with and without restenosis, but there were no significant differences among groups. There was also no relationship of any OxLDL marker to lesion length, %DS, or minimal lumen diameter. No differences were noted in stent versus balloon-treated patients. Conclusions Serial measurement of a comprehensive panel of circulating OxLDL markers after uncomplicated PCI for stable angina does not predict restenosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available