4.5 Article

Low circulating androgens and mortality risk in heart failure

期刊

HEART
卷 96, 期 7, 页码 504-509

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2009.181065

关键词

-

资金

  1. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective Deficiency of anabolic sex steroids is common in heart failure (HF). The pathophysiological implications of this phenomenon, however, have not been fully elucidated. This clinical study investigated the significance of low serum androgen levels in HF. Design Prospective cohort study. Patients and Methods In 191 consecutively recruited men with HF (mean age 64 years; New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I-IV 24%/35%/35%/6%) and reduced (ejection fraction (EF) <= 40%, n = 96) or preserved (EF > 40%, n 95) left ventricular function total and free serum testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) were measured. The median observation period was 859 days. Results During follow-up 53 patients (28%) died. Whereas total serum testosterone was normal in most patients (91%), free testosterone and DHEAS were reduced in 79% and 23%, respectively. DHEAS and free testosterone, but not total testosterone, were inversely associated with NYHA class (both p<0.01). Lower free testosterone and DHEAS and higher SHBG predicted all-cause mortality risk (hazard ratio (HR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96 per 1 ng/dl free testosterone, p = 0.004; HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.00 per 10 mu g/dl DHEAS, p = 0.058; and HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.33 per 10 nmol/l SHBG, p = 0.006, respectively; adjusted for age and NYHA class). However, further adjustment for carefully selected confounding factors abolished these associations. Conclusion In male HF patients, low serum levels of androgens are associated with adverse prognosis, but this relation is confounded by indicators of a poor health state. The results suggest that low serum androgens develop as a sequel of this progressive multifaceted systemic disorder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据