4.3 Article

Red wine acutely induces favorable effects on wave reflections and central pressures in coronary artery disease patients

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 18, 期 9, 页码 1161-1167

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.03.744

关键词

red wine; arterial stiffness; coronary artery disease; central pressures; wave reflections

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To investigate red wine's acute effects on aortic pressures and arterial stiffness in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Fifteen patients with CAD were recruited in a double-blind, cross-over study, which was comprised of 2 study days. Each volunteer consumed either 250 mL of regular or 250 mL of dealcoholized red wine. Wave reflections, expressed as augmentation index (AIx), as well as central and peripheral blood pressures (BP) were assessed at fast and 30, 60, and 90 min postprandially. Results: Both regular and dealcoholized red wine caused a significant decrease in AN by 10.5% +/- 1.4% (P = .001) and 6.1% +/- 1.4% (P = .011), respectively, whereas no significant change was induced in mean BP and timing of wave reflections expressing pulse wave velocity. Peripheral systolic BPs remained unaltered in both beverages, whereas a significant decrease in peripheral and central diastolic BPs was observed after the dealcoholized red wine consumption (P = .03 and P = .035, respectively). Central systolic BP was decreased after the consumption of regular (-7.4 +/- 2.4 mm Hg, P = .05) and dealcoholized red wine (-5.4 +/- 2.7 mm Hg, P = .019). Conclusions: Both types of red wine provoked favorable acute effects on wave reflections and central systolic pressures, whereas no such effect was evident at the brachial artery. Therefore, these findings could be attributed mainly to red wine antioxidant substances, rendering it a possible means of at least acute attenuation of increased wave reflections, arterial stiffness, and central pressures in patients with coronary artery disease.

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