4.7 Article

Associations of insulin levels with left ventricular structure and function in American Indians - The Strong Heart Study

期刊

DIABETES
卷 51, 期 5, 页码 1543-1547

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.51.5.1543

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We evaluated the association of insulin and echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) measurements in 1,388 (45% men) nondiabetic American Indian participants in the Strong Heart Study (SHS). Significant (all P < 0.05) relations were found in men and women between log(10) fasting insulin and LV mass (r = 0.24 and 0.26), left atrial diameter (r = 0.25 and 0.28), posterior wall thickness (r = 0.20 and 0.26), septal thickness (r = 0.19 and 0.24), LV diameter (r = 0.17 and 0.16), and cardiac output (r = 0.20 and 0.24) and in women relative wall thickness (r = 0.11) and peripheral resistance (r = -0.17). In regression analyses, adjusting for BMI, age, height, and systolic pressure, fasting insulin was independently correlated with cardiac output in men and relative wall thickness and septal thickness in women (all P < 0.05). The 97th percentiles of fasting insulin (25 muU/ml for men, and 23 muU/ml for women) in 163 apparently normal (BMI < 26; blood pressure < 140/90; and absence of diabetes, valvular disease, LV wall motion abnormality, or antihypertensive treatment) SHS participants were used to separate normal from elevated fasting insulin levels. Adjusting for age, BMI, and height, men with elevated insulin levels had larger LV diameters (5.41 vs. 5.16 cm; P = 0.05), higher cardiac output (5.5 vs. 4.9 l/min; P < 0.001), and lower peripheral resistance (1,487 vs. 1,666; P = 0.01), paralleling results of regression analyses. Positive relations between insulin and heart size in nondiabetic adults are largely due to associations with body size; after adjustments for covariates, fasting insulin levels are related to greater LV size and cardiac output in men and more concentric LV geometry in women.

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