4.4 Article

High-density lipoprotein levels are strongly associated with the recovery rate of insulin sensitivity during the acute phase of myocardial infarction: A study by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL LIPIDOLOGY
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 24-28

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacl.2012.10.003

关键词

-

资金

  1. Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq)
  2. CNPq [308550/2010-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The decrease of insulin sensitivity (IS) during myocardial infarction (MI) is strongly associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Recent data suggest that in individuals under stable conditions, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) may improve IS. To date, the role of HDL in the modulation of IS in acute metabolic stress conditions such as MI remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To explore the association between plasma HDL-C and the change in IS during the acute phase of MI. METHODS: Consecutive nondiabetic patients with ST-segment elevation MI (n = 22) underwent direct measurement of IS through the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp on the first morning and on the fifth day after onset of MI. Patients were grouped according to HDL-C levels at admission above and below the median value (35 mg/dL). RESULTS: At admission, there was no significant difference in baseline IS index, clinical, anthropometric, or treatment characteristics between low and high HDL groups. Between admission and fifth day, there was a decrease of 8% in IS index in the low HDL group and an 11% increase in the high HDL group (P = .001 for intragroup and P = .012 for intergroup difference). This difference remained significant after we controlled for the sex, age, waist circumference, triglycerides, baseline IS index, and statin dose during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to provide evidence that plasma levels of HDL-C are strongly associated with the recovery rate of IS during the acute phase of MI. (C) 2013 National Lipid Association. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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