4.7 Article

Carotid Vascular Abnormalities in Primary Hyperparathyroidism

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
卷 94, 期 10, 页码 3849-3856

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2009-1086

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 DK066329, K24 DK074457, UL1 RR024156]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Data on the presence, extent, and reversibility of cardiovascular disease in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) are conflicting. Objective: This study evaluated carotid structure and function in PHPT patients compared with population-based controls. Design: This is a case-control study. Setting: The study was conducted in a university hospital metabolic bone disease unit. Participants: Forty-nine men and women with PHPT and 991 controls without PHPT were studied. Outcome Measures: We measured carotid intima-media thickness (IMT), carotid plaque presence and thickness, and carotid stiffness, strain, and distensibility. Results: IMT, carotid plaque thickness, carotid stiffness, and distensibility were abnormal in PHPT patients, and IMT was higher in patients than controls (0.959 vs. 0.907 mm, P < 0.0001). In PHPT, PTH levels, but not calcium concentration, predicted carotid stiffness (P = 0.04), strain (P = 0.06), and distensibility (P = 0.07). Patients with increased carotid stiffness had significantly higher PTH levels than did those with normal stiffness (141 +/- 48 vs. 94.9 +/- 44 pg/ml, P = 0.002), and odds of abnormal stiffness increased 1.91 (confidence interval = 1.09-3.35; P = 0.024) for every 10 pg/ml increase in PTH, adjusted for age, creatinine, and albumin-corrected calcium. Conclusions: Mild PHPT is associated with subclinical carotid vascular manifestations. IMT, a predictor of cardiovascular outcomes, is increased. Measures of carotid stiffness are associated with extent of PTH elevation, suggesting that those with more severe PHPT may have impaired vascular compliance and that PTH, rather than calcium, is the mediator. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94: 3849-3856, 2009)

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