4.7 Article

Metformin improves endothelial function in normoinsulinemic PCOS patients:: a new prospective

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 23, 期 9, 页码 2127-2133

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/den230

关键词

polycystic ovary syndrome; cardiovascular disease; endothelial function; androgens; metformin

资金

  1. Ministry of Public Health La prevenzione dell'handicap mentale IRCCS Troina (EN)-Italy
  2. Ministry of University and Research (MIUR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Metformin was reported to improve the alterations of endothelial reactivity in normal-weight subjects with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The aim of the present study was to investigate the mechanisms of action of this drug on the vascular function of this population. METHODS: Thirteen normal-weight, normoinsulinemic and normolipemic PCOS women were studied before and after 6 months of metformin treatment (1000 mg/day). The endothelial function was assessed by evaluating the flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) of the brachial artery. We correlated this parameter with the endocrine-metabolic features of the patients. RESULTS: Metformin significantly reduced testosterone (1.56 +/- 0.52 after 6 months versus 2.98 +/- 1.00 at baseline) and 17-hydroxyprogesterone (0.03 +/- 0.01 versus 0.06 +/- 0.02 nmol/ml) levels, without affecting gluco-insulinemic parameters. Concomitantly, the basal vessel diameter and the FMD significantly increased (4.12 +/- 0.68 versus 3.2 +/- 0.41 and 5.2 +/- 0.6 versus 3.76 +/- 0.5 mm, respectively), thus documenting an improved endothellial function. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the positive effects of metformin on the altered vascular reactivity, a precocious marker of cardiovascular risk, in normoinsulinemic PCOS subjects. This improvement seems to be mediated through hormonal changes, thus highlighting the detrimental role of hyperandrogenemia on the endothelial function, even beyond the metabolic factors. However, a direct effect of metformin on the endothelium should not be excluded.

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

4.7
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