4.7 Article

Metyrapone improves endothelial dysfunction in patients with treated depression

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.12.078

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [G9810900] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. MRC [G9810900] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES This study sought to examine the effect of metyrapone on endothelial dysfunction in patients with treated recurrent major depression. BACKGROUND Depression is an independent risk factor for the development of coronary heart disease, and patients with depression have endothelial dysfunction, an atherogenic abnormality. This abnormality may be attributable to abnormal hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis function, a feature of depression, resulting in increased exposure to cortisol. Cortisol administration produces endothelial dysfunction in healthy subjects. METHODS We measured endothelial function using flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery in 30 patients with depression and in 36 matched control subjects. Patients were randomized (double blind) to metyrapone (an inhibitor of cortisol synthesis) or placebo, and FMD was remeasured 6 h later. RESULTS At baseline, FMD was impaired in patients versus control subjects (mean [standard error]), -1.27% [0.91%] vs. 4.37% [0.59%] (p < 0.001). The FMD was similar in the placebo and the metyrapone patient groups at baseline (0.17% [1.04%] vs. -2.72% [1.30%], p = 0.11). Metyrapone significantly reduced plasma cortisol levels. There was a significant improvement in FMD in the metyrapone group from -2.72% [1.30%] to 3.82% [0.99%] (p < 0.001), whereas the change in the placebo group, from 0.17% [1.04%] to 1.15% [1.14%], was not significant. Analysis of covariation showed that the effect of metyrapone was significant (p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS Inhibition of cortisol production by metyrapone ameliorates the endothelial dysfunction seen in depression, suggesting that the mechanism of the endothelial dysfunction may involve cortisol.

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

4.7
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