4.7 Review

Vascular consequences of menopause and hormone therapy: Importance of timing of treatment and type of estrogen

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 66, 期 2, 页码 295-306

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2004.12.012

关键词

aging; menopause; hormone therapy; estrogen; cardiovascular disease

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL-68946] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Premenopausal women have a lower risk for cardiovascular events, and mortality due to coronary vascular disease (CVD) in premenopausal women is rare. These facts suggest that endogenous estrogens, such as estradiol, protect the cardiovascular system, and several observational studies and a few small clinical studies conducted in healthy and younger postmenopausal women support this hypothesis. In contrast, two large randomized clinical trials (RCTs), using conjugated equine estrogens and conducted in older women with established CVD or without overt CVD, failed to demonstrate protection against CVD by exogenous estrogens. These divergent findings have resulted in confusion with regard to the association between estrogen deficiency and CVD in postmenopausal women. In order to reconcile these contradictory findings, it is necessary to examine the pathophysiology associated with age-dependent changes within the vessel wall and to compare the pharmacology of different types of estrogens. Understanding age-dependent changes in vascular pathology and the pharmacology of different estrogens may facilitate the development of therapeutic strategies for hormone replacement therapy (HRT) that would be effective in delaying vascular remodeling leading to CVD following menopause. In this review we provide an overview of the impact of menopause and estrogen deficiency on vascular remodeling and emphasize the importance of timing and type of estrogen to achieve maximum benefits with regard to reducing the risk of CVD. (c) 2004 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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