4.3 Article

Endothelial impairment and bone marrow-derived CD34+/133+ cells in diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction

期刊

JOURNAL OF DIABETES INVESTIGATION
卷 3, 期 6, 页码 526-533

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2012.00230.x

关键词

Diabetes mellitus; Endothelial progenitor cells; Erectile dysfunction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims/Introduction: The present study was undertaken to determine vascular endothelial impairment and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and erectile dysfunction (ED). Materials and Methods: A total of 100 type 2 diabetic men were enrolled. Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and anaerobic threshold (AT) were measured. Also, EPCs in the peripheral blood were determined by flow cytometry. Results: In the 42 ED diabetic patients, FMD and AT were significantly less than those in the 58 patients with normal erectile function (FMD 2.84 vs 3.82%, P = 0.038, and AT 11.2 vs 12.7 mL/kg/min, P = 0.022). Exercise tolerance significantly increased the number of EPCs in the patients with and without ED (49-60 cells/100 mu L, P = 0.015, and 72-99 cells/100 mu L, P = 0.003). In the diabetic patients without autonomic neuropathy, FMD was significantly reduced in the patients with ED than those without ED (P = 0.015). In response to exercise tolerance, the number of EPCs increased in both the diabetic patients with ED (P = 0.003) and without ED (P = 0.007). In contrast, in the diabetic patients with autonomic neuropathy, there was no difference in FMD between the patients with and without ED. The exercise tolerance increased the number of EPCs in the patients without ED (P = 0.023), but it disappeared in those with ED. Conclusions: ED diabetic patients have endothelial impairment during the early period of diabetic complications, whose deranged endothelial function is concomitantly repaired by promoting bone marrow-derived EPCs. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.20401124.2012.00230.x, 2012)

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

4.3
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