4.7 Article

Inflammation, as measured by the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, is an independent predictor for the development of heart failure

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 45, 期 11, 页码 1802-1806

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.02.066

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES Our objective was to explore inflammation, measured as erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), as a predictor for the development of heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND In recent years, evidence of the importance of inflammation in the pathophysiology of HF has emerged, and various inflammatory markers have been found to predict future HF. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate is an inexpensive and easily accessible marker of systemic inflammation, but to this date it is unknown whether ESR predicts subsequent HF. METHODS In a community-based prospective study of 2,314 middle-aged men free from HF, myocardial infarction, and valvular disease at baseline, ESR was analyzed in multivariable models together with established risk factors for HF (hypertension, diabetes, electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy, smoking, obesity, and serum cholesterol) and hematocrit. RESULTS A total of 282 men developed HF during a median follow-up time of 30 years. In Cox proportional hazards analyses, ESR was an independent predictor of HF (hazard ratio 1.46 for highest quartile vs. the lowest, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 2.06). This observation remained significant when also adjusting for interim myocardial infarction during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Erythrocyte sedimentation rate was a significant predictor of HF, independent of established risk factors for HF, and interim myocardial infarction after three decades of follow-up in a population-based sample of middle-aged men. Our findings indicate that inflammation occurs early in the process leading to HF and that ESR could be used to evaluate this process.(c) 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

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