4.7 Article

Lack of effect of oral vitamin C on blood pressure, oxidative stress and endothelial function in Type II diabetes

Journal

CLINICAL SCIENCE
Volume 103, Issue 4, Pages 339-344

Publisher

PORTLAND PRESS
DOI: 10.1042/cs1030339

Keywords

diabetes; endothelial function; isoprostanes; oxidative stress; vitamin C

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Type II diabetes is characterized by increased oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction and hypertension. We investigated whether short-term treatment with oral vitamin C reduces oxidative stress and improves endothelial function and blood pressure in subjects with Type II diabetes. Subjects (n=35) received vitamin C (1.5 g daily in three doses) or matching placebo for 3 weeks in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group design. Plasma concentrations of 8-epi-prostaglandin F-2alpha (8-epi-PGF(2alpha)), a non-enzymically derived oxidation product of arachidonic acid, were used as a marker of oxidative stress. Endothelial function was assessed by measuring forearm blood flow responses to brachial artery infusion of the endothelium-dependent vasodilator acetylcholine (with nitroprusside as an endothelium-independent control) and by the pulse wave responses to systemic albuterol (endothelium-dependent vasodilator) and glyceryl trinitrate (endothelium-independent vasodilator). Plasma concentrations of vitamin C increased from 58+/-6 to 122+/-10 mumol/l after vitamin C, but 8-epi-PGF(2alpha) levels (baseline, 95+/-4 pg/l; after treatment, 99+/-5 pg/l), blood pressure (baseline, 141+/-5/80+/-2 mmHg; after treatment, 141+/-5/81+/-3 mmHg) and endothelial function, as assessed by the systemic vasodilator response to albuterol and by the forearm blood flow response to acetylcholine, were not significantly different from baseline or placebo. Thus treatment with vitamin C (1.5 g daily) for 3 weeks does not significantly improve oxidative stress, blood pressure or endothelial function in patients with Type II diabetes.

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