4.7 Article

Acute and prolonged effects of sildenafil on brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation in type 2 diabetes

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 1336-1339

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.25.8.1336

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE- Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD), induced by occlusion of the brachial artery, is an index of nitric oxide-dependent endothelial function that is impaired in patients with type 2 diabetes. Sildenafil (Viagra) is an inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE-5), which is used for management of erectile dysfunction in a broad range of patients, including those with type 2 diabetes. Its effects on endothelial function in these patients have not been previously assessed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS- We assessed the acute and prolonged effects of a low dose of sildenafil (25 mg) on FMD in patients with type 2 diabetes. We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over trial in 16 patients (14 of whom completed the study) with type 2 diabetes who had erectile dysfunction without overt clinical heart disease. RESULTS- in these patients, the mean +/- SD brachial artery diameter (BAD) measured by ultrasound was 4.33 +/- 0.6 mm. After inducing FMD, the BAD increased 8% to 4.66 +/- 0.6 mm (P = 0.2). One hour after oral administration of sildenafil 25 mg, FMD increased the BAD significantly by 15% to 4.99 +/- 0.5 min (P less than or equal to 0.01), whereas it did not change with placebo (4.6 +/- 0.6 mm, P = 0.1). After treatment with sildenafil 25 mg daily for 2 weeks and testing 24 h after the last dose, the mean FMD was 14% (P = 0.01). In contrast, the mean FMD with placebo was 9% (P = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS- We conclude that acute and prolonged sildenafil treatment has a favorable effect on brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation that persists for at least 24 h after the last dose. Further investigation is needed to determine whether this prolonged effect has clinical implications in patients with type 2 diabetes.

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