4.6 Article

The relation between impaired glucose tolerance and slow coronary flow

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 111, 期 1, 页码 142-146

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.09.007

关键词

slow coronary flow; impaired glucose tolerance; endothelium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Impaired glucose tolerance is a preliminary stage in the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus and has been shown to increase the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in addition to causing endothelial dysfunction. In this study, we sought to determine if impaired glucose tolerance is related to slow coronary flow, an angiographic phenomenon caused by coronary micro and macrovascular endothelial dysfunction. Methods: The population of this prospective study consisted of 28 patients with documented slow coronary flow, defined according to TIMI frame count method, [20 (71.4%) males; 51 +/- 9 years] and 30 patients with normal coronary flow [17 (56.6%) males; 47 +/- 6 years]. All study patients underwent an oral glucose tolerance test after 12 h of fasting. Lipid profile, hemoglobin Ale and systemic blood pressure were measured in all patients. Results: There was no difference between two groups with respect to age, fasting plasma glucose, triglyceride, total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein, low density lipoprotein, hemoglobin Ale, systolic-diastolic blood pressure levels, history of smoking and alcohol consumption. Plasma glucose at 2 h of oral glucose tolerance test was significantly higher in slow coronary flow patients compared to control group (145 +/- 44 vs. 112 +/- 38 mg/dl, P=0.001, respectively). In addition, the number of patients who met the criteria of impaired glucose tolerance was significantly higher in slow coronary flow patient group [16 (57%) vs. 7 (23%), P=0.002, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest that impaired glucose tolerance may be an independent etiological factor for slow coronary flow phenomenon. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.6
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