Negatively charged low-density lipoprotein is associated with atherogenic risk in hypertensive patients

Negatively charged low-density lipoprotein is associated with atherogenic risk in hypertensive patients
复制标题

带负电荷的低密度脂蛋白与高血压患者的动脉粥样硬化风险相关

DOI:
10.1007/s00380-011-0139-z
复制
发表时间:
2011
期刊:
影响因子:
1.5
通讯作者:
Maemura K
Maemura K
中科院分区:
医学4区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Urata J;Ikeda S;Koga S;Nakata T;Yasunaga T;Sonoda K;Koide Y;Ashizawa N;Kohno S;Maemura K

文献摘要

相似文献

通过氧化、乙酰化或糖基化等多种过程产生的带负电荷的低密度脂蛋白(LDL)在动脉粥样硬化和相关疾病的发生和发展中起关键作用。阴离子交换高效液相色谱(AE-HPLC)可根据LDL颗粒电荷将LDL亚组分分为LDL-1、LDL-2和LDL-3,但LDL亚组分的临床意义尚未阐明。本研究的目的是确定这些分数的临床意义,特别是关于高血压患者的动脉粥样硬化风险。98例原发性高血压患者(年龄67.0 ± 10.7岁; 54例男性)入组本研究。LDL亚组分和动脉粥样硬化危险因素之间的关系,包括血脂,血压和血浆8-异前列腺素作为氧化应激的标志物,进行了检查。LDL-1水平与体重指数(r= − 0.384,p < 0.001)、收缩压(r= − 0.457,p < 0.001)、非高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平(r= − 0.457,p < 0.001)和8-异前列腺素水平(r= − 0.415,p < 0.001)呈显著负相关。LDL-3是总LDL中带负电荷最多的部分,与这些参数呈显著正相关(r分别为0.267、0.481、0.357和0.337)。与高血压控制良好的患者相比,高血压控制不良的患者LDL-1水平显著降低(p< 0.001),LDL-2和LDL-3水平显著升高(均< 0.001)。此外,参与研究时传统风险因素总数的增加,而不是先前的诊断,与LDL-1水平降低以及LDL-2和LDL-3水平升高相关。这些数据表明,低密度脂蛋白亚组分与多种致动脉粥样硬化的危险因素,治疗,以改变这些危险因素可能会导致低密度脂蛋白亚组分水平的变化。总之,通过AE-HPLC分离的LDL亚组分可能代表高血压患者致动脉粥样硬化风险的标志物。
Negatively charged low-density lipoprotein (LDL), generated via multiple processes such as oxidation, acetylation, or glycosylation, plays a key role in the initiation and progression of atherosclerosis and related diseases. Anion-exchange high-performance liquid chromatography (AE-HPLC) can subfractionate LDL into LDL-1, LDL-2, and LDL-3 based on LDL particle charge, but the clinical significance of LDL subfractions has not yet been elucidated. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical significance of these fractions with particular regard to atherogenic risk in hypertensive patients. Ninety-eight patients with essential hypertension (age 67.0 ± 10.7 years; 54 males) were enrolled in the present study. The relationships between LDL subfractions and atherogenic risk factors, including lipid profiles, blood pressure and plasma 8-isoprostane as a marker of oxidative stress, were examined. LDL-1 levels were significantly and negatively correlated with body mass index (r= −0.384,p< 0.001), systolic blood pressure (r= −0.457,p< 0.001), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (r= −0.457,p< 0.001) and 8-isoprostane levels (r= −0.415,p< 0.001). LDL-3, which is the most negatively charged fraction of total LDL, was significantly and positively correlated with these parameters (r= 0.267, 0.481, 0.357, and 0.337, respectively). LDL-1 levels were significantly lower (p< 0.001), and LDL-2 and LDL-3 levels were significantly higher (eachp< 0.001) in patients with poorly controlled hypertension than in patients with well-controlled hypertension. In addition, an increase in the total number of traditional risk factors at time of study participation, but not previous diagnosis, was associated with a decrease in LDL-1 levels and increases in LDL-2 and LDL-3 levels. These data suggest that LDL subfractions are associated with multiple atherogenic risk factors and that treatment to modify these risk factors could result in changes in LDL subfraction levels. In conclusion, LDL subfractions isolated by AE-HPLC may represent a marker of atherogenic risk in patients with hypertension.