4.5 Article

Endothelial progenitor cells in patients with essential hypertension

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 127-132

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3280109271

关键词

angiogenesis; endothelium; hypertension; risk factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective(s) The eventual role of blood pressure on the endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) has rarely been evaluated and data collected so far relate to patients with co-existing coronary heart disease. Methods We have studied the number and functional activity of EPC as well as the number of EPC endothelial colony-forming units (CFU) in a carefully selected group of 36 patients with essential hypertension and 24 normotensive control subjects. Results In patients with essential hypertension, the EPC number was not statistically different from that found in control subjects (mean +/- SD, essential hypertension 58 +/- 29, controls 53 +/- 20; EPC/high power field). CFU per well were not statistically different in patients with essential hypertension compared with normotensive controls (mean SD, patients with essential hypertension 2.4 +/- 2.6, normotensive controls 3 +/- 3.3 CFU/well). In essential hypertension patients, the EPC number was inversely correlated with both total (R = 0.635, P < 0.0001) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (R = 0.486, P < 0.05). Neither the EPC number nor the EPC CFU were correlated with age, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, body mass index, lipoprotein(a), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein or homocysteine. Conclusions The present study shows that essential hypertension is not characterized by the altered number or functional activity of EPC. Plasma total and LDL-cholesterol are independent predictors of reduced numbers of circulating EPC in essential hypertension patients. The absence of any correlation between the characteristics of EPC and several markers predictive of cardiovascular damage merits further investigation.

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

4.5
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