4.3 Article

Relationships Among Hyperuricemia, Metabolic Syndrome, and Endothelial Function

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 24, 期 7, 页码 770-774

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2011.55

关键词

blood pressure; endothelial function; hypertension; hyperuricemia; metabolic syndrome; risk factors; uric acid

资金

  1. Japanese Arteriosclerosis Prevention Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND We evaluated the relationship of the severity of hyperuricemia and the flow-mediated vasodilatation of the brachial artery (FMD) in patients with and without the metabolic syndrome (MetS). METHODS In a cross-sectional study, FMD was obtained in 2,732 Japanese healthy men (49 8 years) who had no cardiovascular (CV) disease and were not on any medication for CV risk factors. MetS was defined according to Japanese criteria, and serum uric acid (UA) levels in the upper half of the fifth (highest) quintile range were defined as severe hyperuricemia, whereas those in the lower half of this quintile range were defined as mild hyperuricemia. RESULTS Overall, the adjusted values of FMD were lower in the subjects with MetS (5.6 +/- 0.1%; n = 413) than in those without MetS (6.2 +/- 0.1%; n = 2,319) (P < 0.01). Among the subjects without MetS, the adjusted values of FMD were lower in both the subgroups with mild hyperuricemia and severe hyperuricemia than in the subgroup without hyperuricemia. On the contrary, among the subjects with MetS, the adjusted value of FMD was lower only in the subgroup with severe hyperuricemia (4.8 +/- 0.3%) as compared with that in the group without hyperuricemia (5.7 +/- 0.2%) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS In middle-aged healthy Japanese men without MetS, not only severe, but also mild hyperuricemia may be a significant independent risk factor for endothelial dysfunction in subjects without MetS, whereas only severe hyperuricemia (but not mild hyperuricemia) appeared to exacerbate endothelial dysfunction in similar subjects with MetS.

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