4.5 Review

Arterial function in youth: window into cardiovascular risk

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 105, 期 1, 页码 325-333

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00001.2008

关键词

children; intima-media thickness; endothelial function; arterial stiffness

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Noninvasive measures of arterial function, such as intima-media thickness (IMT), endothelial function, and arterial stiffness are associated with and are prognostic of cardiovascular events in adults. Postmortem evidence, however, has established that the atherosclerotic process starts in childhood. Furthermore, cardiovascular morbidities in childhood disrupt arterial health and may lead to adverse outcomes in adulthood. Thus it is important to examine the developmental changes in IMT, endothelial function, and arterial stiffness in healthy youth in contrast to the arterial health profile of youth with cardiovascular morbidities and to examine the effect of lifestyle interventions. In healthy youth, IMT may increase slightly, arterial stiffness increases, but there is no change in endothelial function from 5 to 20 years of age. In youth with cardiovascular risk factors there are larger increases in IMT and arterial stiffness, and reductions in endothelial function compared with healthy youth. The reduced arterial function in youth with cardiovascular risk factors may be related to the atherosclerotic process. Exercise and physical activity appear to exert a protective effect on arterial function, and exercise training can improve arterial function in children with cardiovascular risk factors. Furthermore, although diet alone can improve arterial function in children, the combination of exercise and diet appears to be more effective than either intervention alone. Future studies need to focus on the mechanism by which exercise and diet improve arterial function, the most effective types of diet and exercise, and if intervening in childhood leads to favorable outcomes in adulthood.

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