4.3 Article

Relationship between arterial stiffness and myocardial damage in patients with newly diagnosed essential hypertension

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 21, 期 9, 页码 989-993

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.235

关键词

-

资金

  1. Karadeniz Technical University Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND Arterial stiffness increases in hypertensive individuals. Arterial stiffness is associated with impairment of systolic and diastolic myocardial function in hypertension (HT). However, the relationship between arterial stiffness and serum heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP) levels, a sensitive marker of myocardial damage, has not been previously examined in patients with HT. We investigate the relationship between serum H-FABP levels and arterial stiffness in patients with newly diagnosed HT. METHODS We studied 46 (48.5 +/- 10.6, years) never-treated patients with HT and age-matched control group of 40 (47 +/- 8.6, years) normotensive individuals. H-FABP levels were determined in all subjects. We evaluated arterial stiffness and wave reflections of study population, using applanation tonometry (Sphygmocor). Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) was measured as indices of elastic-type, aortic stiffness. The heart rate-corrected augmentation index (Alx@75) was estimated as a marker of wave reflections. RESULTS Carotid-femoral PWV (10.5 +/- 2.2 vs. 8.7 +/- 1.6, m/s, P = 0.0001) and Alx@75 (22.7 +/- 9.5 vs. 15 +/- 11, %, P = 0.001) were significantly higher in patients with HT than control group. H-FABP levels were increased in hypertensive patients compared with control group (21.1 +/- 14.8 vs. 12.9 +/- 8.5, ng/ml, P = 0.002). In multiple linear regression analysis, we found that the body mass index (beta = 0.42, P = 0.0001) and carotid-femoral PWV (beta = 0.23, P = 0.03) were significant determinants of H-FABP levels. CONCLUSION Arterial stiffness is associated with serum H-FABP levels, a sensitive marker of myocardial damage, in patients with newly diagnosed HT.

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