Blood pressure as a marker of subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetes

Katipoglu B.; Yildirim D.I.; Cobankara O.E.; Kizilarslanoglu M.C.

doi:https://doi.org/10.17116/kardio202114061483

Introduction

Prediabetes is a pathological condition caused by initial disruption of glucose metabolism before development of diabetes. Prediabetes is accepted as a risk factor of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases [1]. Vascular inflammation is triggered by the effects of hyperglycemia in prediabetic patients and subclinical atherosclerotic changes detected in vascular system [2]. Furthermore, subclinical atherosclerotic changes occur with similar incidence in cerebral, carotid and coronary arteries [3]. For that reason, carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) has been evaluated for demonstration of subclinical atherosclerosis in many studies due to its availability for ultrasound examination (US) [4, 5]. Increased CIMT indicates subclinical atherosclerosis and possible cardiovascular problems in the future [6].

Another measurement used for the diagnosis of vascular pathology is the ankle-brachial pressure index (ABPI). Lower ABPI scores are considered to be associated with peripheral artery disease [7], while higher ABPI is suspicious for calcified vessels and arterial stiffness. ABPI is also accepted as an indicator of atherosclerosis in diabetic patients [8]. Furthermore, the blood pressure index (BPI) is a novel marker for demonstration of increased artery stiffness and atherosclerosis among subjects with the risk of cognitive impairment [9].

It is well known that prediabetic patients also have an increased cardiovascular risk. Demonstration of subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients is important for early prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Associations between BPI, CIMT and ABPI have not been well clarified in prediabetic patients. We believe that BPI, CIMT and ABPI may be good indicators of subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients. We evaluated BPI, CIMT and ABPI in prediabetic patients and compared these values in diabetic and control groups.

Material and methods

The present research was designed as an age- and gender-adjusted case-control study. Ninety persons referred to the internal medicine clinic were enrolled in the study. Exclusion criteria were familial hyperlipidemia, infection diseases, hematological diseases, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular diseases, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, hypo/hyperthyroidism and smoking.

The present study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Committee. All participants signed an informed consent prior to the study.

Demographic characteristics, blood count and biochemical parameters were obtained from their files.

Definitions

Diagnoses of prediabetes and diabetes were made in accordance with the criteria of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) [10].

The criteria for prediabetes were fasting serum glucose 100-125 mg/dL or postprandial serum glucose 140-200 mg/dL after oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) or HbA1c level within 5.7-6.4% according to the ADA guidelines. The criteria for diabetes were fasting serum glucose ≥126 mg/dL, postprandial serum glucose 200 mg/dL and HbA1c >6.5% in accordance with the ADA guidelines [10]. The control group consisted of individuals without any chronic diseases or previous medication.

Anthropometric measurements

Body weight (kg) was measured using an electronic scale (Seca 770, Seca United Kingdom, Birmingham, UK) after sufficient calibration (sensitivity ± 0.1 kg). Measurements were rounded up to 100 g. Height (m) was measured by stadiometer (Seca 222).

Body mass index (BMI) was determined as body weight (kg) divided into body surface area (m²). All measurements were carried out in a standing position in light clothing without shoes.

Ankle-brachial pressure index and blood pressure index

Systolic blood pressure was measured using Medisana MTM U80C sphygmomanometer (Medisana AG, Neuss, Germany) and portable Doppler device on the upper arm and the ankle. ABPI was calculated by dividing the ankle pressure (dorsalis pedis) into systolic pressure of the brachial artery for each lower extremity. BPI was calculated as systolic blood pressure divided into diastolic blood pressure [11, 12]. Measurements were performed in a silent room at a fixed temperature after keeping the supine position for 10 minutes.

Carotid intima-media thickness

CIMT was measured using ACUSON Sequoia US device (high-resolution US machine, Image Point HX, Agilent) equipped with a 5-10 MHz linear probe. CIMT was measured in supine position and the neck was slightly turned to the opposite side for analysis of carotid arteries. Maximum value after bilateral measurements was accepted as CIMT in a certain patient. Presence or absence of plaques was noted. All scans were performed by an experienced radiologist who was not previously informed about clinical characteristics of patients.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 20 software for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Normal distribution of data was evaluated by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Numeric variables with normal distribution were presented as mean ± standard deviation, whereas those without normal distribution were presented as median (min-max). Differences of numeric variables with normal distribution were evaluated by ANOVA test and numeric variables without normal distribution were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. The chi-square test was used to compare categorical data. The association between numeric variables was analyzed using the Spearman or Pearson correlation analysis. ROC analysis and the Youden index were used to find out cut-off values for markers in predicting subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetes patients. The cut-off value with the highest Youden index was accepted as the best one. Differences were significant at p-value <0.05.

Results

Mean age and BMI were 49.6±9.9 years and 32.4±7.5 kg/m², respectively. There were 52.4% of females. Comparison of socio-demographic parameters, anthropometric measurements and laboratory parameters is shown in Table 1. Comparison of lipid panels (total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides) did not reveal any significant difference between prediabetic, diabetic patients and the control group (p>0.05). Hemoglobin level was 13.5±1.0 g/dL in the prediabetic group, 13.3±1.1 g/dL in the control group and 14.5±1.7 g/dL in the diabetic group. Difference in hemoglobin level between diabetic patients and other groups was significant (p=0.02). Leukocyte count was 6.4·10³ µL^–¹ in prediabetic patients, 7.6·10³µL^–¹in the control group and 8·10³ µL^–¹ in the diabetic group. Significant difference was detected between the control group, diabetic and prediabetic groups (p<0.001). Fasting plasma glucose was 99 (81-121) mg/dL in the prediabetic group, 96 (76-99) and 131 (93-232) mg/dL in the control and diabetic groups, respectively. HbA1c was 5.9% (5.7-6.2%) in the prediabetic group, 5.5% (4.7-5.6%) in the control group and 7.0% (6.0-13.0%) in the diabetic group. Differences between fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c were significant between prediabetes, diabetes and the control group (p<0.001). The ratio of monocytes to HDL cholesterol (MHR) was 12.3, 13.2 and 10.8 in prediabetic, diabetic patients and control subjects, respectively. Between-group differences were significant (p=0.005).

Table 1. Demographic, anthropometric and laboratory parameters.

Variables	Control (n=30)	Prediabetes (n=30)	Diabetes (n=30)	p-value
Age, years	51.4±8.6	51.8±7.7	51.7±9.7	0.123
Height, cm	159.6±7.2	157.8±7.4	163.9±11.3	0.291
Weight, kg	92.3±14.1	100.5±20.4	89.8±22.4	0.071
BMI, kg/m²	38.6±6.1	39.5±7.4	34.7±7.8	0.506
Laboratory parameters
Leucocytes, µl^–1	7.6 (4.8-11.3)	6.4 (4.6-9.5)^b	8.0 (5.4-15.2)^a	<0.001*
Monocytes, µl^–1	0.54 (0.3-1.2)	0.45 (0.3-1.7)^b	0.66 (0.4-1.4)^a	0.001*
Hemoglobin, g/dl	13.3±1.1^b	13.5±1.0^b	14.5±1.7^a^,^c	0.002*
Platelets, *10³µl^–1	266 (172-449)	275 (178-425)	268 (196-459)	0.977
Glucose, mg/dl	96 (76-99)^a^,^b	99 (81-121)^b^,^c	131 (93-302)^a^,^c	<0.001*
HbA1c, %	5.5 (4.7-5.6)^a^,^b	5.9 (5.7-6.2)^b^,^c	7.0 (6.0-13.0)^a^,^c	<0.001*
AST, U/l	24 (8-50)	20 (10-43)	23 (16-46)	0.062
Creatinine, mg/dl	0.8 (0.6-1.0)	0.8 (0.6-1.0)	0.86 (0.4-1.1)	0.244
Total cholesterol, mg/dl	218±34	227±43	214±47	0.446
LDL cholesterol, mg/dl	138±29	145±32	126±36	0.069
HDL cholesterol, mg/dl	48 (33-84)	53 (35-72)	48 (30-78)	0.390
Triglyceride, mg/dl	138 (76-341)	140 (55-318)	195 (54-422)	0.080
MHR	10.8 (6.1-28.5) ^a^,^b	12.3 (4.8-33.5) ^b^,^c	13.2 (5.3-31.3) ^a^,^c	0.005*
		Other measurements
BPI	1.76±0.22^a^,^b	1.82±0.26^b^,^c	2.08±0.50^a^,^c	0.034*
ABPI	1.08±0.12^a^,^b	1.10±0.12^b^,^c	1.18±0.11^a^,^c	0.004*
CIMT, mm	0.71±0.18^a^,^b	0.84±0.20^b^,^c	0.91±0.22^a^,^c	0.001*
Plaque, %	1 (3.33)	7 (23.3)	5 (16.7)	0.081

CIMT was 0.71±0.18 mm in the control group, 0.84±0.20 mm in prediabetic patients and 0.91±0.22 mm in diabetic patients (p<0.001) (Fig. 1). There was no significant between-group difference in terms of plaque (p=0.08).

Fig. 1. CIMT in study groups.

ABPI was 1.18±0.11 in diabetic patients, 1.10±0.12 in prediabetic patients and 1.08±0.12 in the control group. Difference was significant for diabetic patients compared to prediabetic patients and the control group. However, differences between prediabetes group and control group were not significant (p=0.004 and p=0.65, respectively) (Fig. 2). BPI was 2.1±0.5 in diabetic patients, 1.8±0.3 in prediabetic patients and 1.8±0.2 in the control group (p<0.001) (Fig. 3).

Fig. 2. ABPI in study groups.

Fig. 3. BPI in study groups.

Correlation analysis revealed significant positive relationships between CIMT and age (r=0.377, p<0.001), HbA1c (r=0.416, p<0.001), MHR (r=0.361, p<0.01), BPI (r=0.284, p<0.01), fasting plasma glucose (r=0.296, p=0.005) and between ABPI and HbA1c (r=0.229, p=0.03). Significant positive correlations between BPI and age (r=0.221, p=0.037), HBA1c (r=0.342, p<0.01), fasting plasma glucose (r=0.232, p=0.028) were also detected (Table 2).

Table 2. Correlation analysis.

Variable	CIMT		ABPI		BPI
Variable	r	p-value	r	p-value	r	p-value
Age	0.377	<0.001*	–0.132	0.214	0.221	<0.037*
CIMT	1	—	–0.004	0.972	0.342	<0.001*
BPI	0.342	<0.001*	0.256	0.345	1
ABPI	–0.004	0.972	1	—	–0.178	0.093
Total cholesterol	–0.021	0.846	–0.019	0.061	0.061	0.565
LDL cholesterol	–0.076	0.477	–0.058	0.062	0.069	0.516
Glucose	0.296	0.005**	0.159	0.135	0.232	0.028**
HDL cholesterol	0.117	0.274	–0.077	0.469	–0.055	0.608
Triglyceride	0.061	0.568	–0.033	0.759	0.145	0.173
HbA1c	0.416	<0.001**	0.229	0.030**	0.256	0.015**
MHR	0.361	0.008**	0.180	0.784	0.124	0.243

ROC analysis was applied to estimate predictive ability of measurements and optimal cut-off values for prediabetes. The optimal cut-off values, as well as sensitivity and specificity of each index are summarized in Table 3. MHR with largest AUC (0.684) was followed by BPI (0.644) and CIMT (0.678) (Fig. 4).

Table 3. Diagnostic accuracy of markers for subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetes.

Variable	AUC	Optimal cut-off value	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)	Youden index
CIMT	0.678	0.73	76.7	58.3	0.35
BPI	0.664	1.81	70.0	60.0	0.30
MHR	0.684	12.64	60.0	75	0.35

Fig. 4. ROC curves for MHR (a), CIMT (b) and BPI (c).

Discussion

Over the last few years, subclinical atherosclerosis has been examined widely in prediabetic patients. However, to our knowledge, this is the first study examining the role of BPI as a new simple and non-invasive marker specifically in prediabetic patients. This parameter also correlates with CIMT. Furthermore, we have found that BPI, CIMT and ABPI were higher in diabetic patients than in other groups. Moreover, prediabetic patients had higher BPI and CIMT compared to the control group. Thus, we can suppose that atherosclerotic process may start before diabetic period.

Prediabetes is accepted as a risk factor of diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, myocardial infarction and stroke [13, 14]. The increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in prediabetic patients has been reviewed in many previous studies [15, 16]. Inflammation and oxidative stress induced by hyperglycemia lead to development of atherosclerosis [17]. Demonstration of subclinical atherosclerosis is also important for prediction of cardiovascular disease [18]. Therefore, many markers have been evaluated as indicators of atherosclerosis [19-22]. High-resolution B-mode US enables non-invasive assessment of arterial wall thickening and progression of subclinical atherosclerosis. For that reason, CIMT was also accepted as an indicator of subclinical atherosclerosis [23]. Furthermore, increase of CIMT is considerably associated with atherosclerosis in other segments of arterial system [24]. Increased CIMT was shown as a strong predictive factor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality [3]. In fact, it is known that diabetes mellitus is associated with cardiovascular diseases. Significant increase of CIMT was also detected in diabetic patients [25]. Moreover, a few studies found thickened carotid intima in prediabetic patients compared to healthy population [19].

CIMT was also found to be significantly higher in prediabetic and diabetic patients in the present study. Considering literature data, we can state that atherosclerosis process starts with prediabetic progression and there is an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases throughout this period. It may be assumed that increased CIMT is detected in parallel with subclinical atherosclerosis induced by hyperglycemia. Furthermore, we detected positive correlations between age, HbA1c, MHR, BPI, fasting plasma glucose and CIMT.

ABPI as essential aspect in diagnosis of peripheral artery disease was investigated in diabetic patients in many recent clinical studies [26-28]. It is accepted as an important screening method for diagnosis of peripheral artery disease in diabetic patients [29]. Previous study detected lower ABPI in prediabetic and diabetic elderly smoking patients [30]. ABPI was also detected to be significantly lower when diabetic and prediabetic patients were scanned for peripheral artery disease. Negative correlation between HbA1c and ABPI was also observed. Moreover, another study has shown that ABPI was significantly lower in prediabetic and hypertensive patients [31].

ABPI increment is also important for calcification and stiffness of vascular system. More importantly, previous studies showed that ABPI may be an indicator of arterial stiffness in patients without peripheral artery disease. ABPI 1.0-1.5 particularly correlated with arterial stiffness [32]. Another study comprising 167 patients detected significantly higher CIMT and ABPI in recently diagnosed diabetic patients compared to prediabetic patients and the control group [33].

Other blood pressure indices were also well studied for demonstration of subclinical atherosclerosis in previous trials. Recently, it was demonstrated that higher BPI as a novel non-invasive simple tool could be associated with arterial stiffness and atherosclerosis [9]. Although the role of atherosclerosis has been postulated in cardiovascular adverse outcomes, there are no data on association between blood pressure and subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients. Our study ensures additional data on the role of blood pressure for identifying subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients. Furthermore, we detected positive correlations between age, HbA1c, CIMT and BPI.

In the present study, we detected that BPI and ABPI were significantly higher in diabetic patients compared to the control group and prediabetic patients. None of the patients enrolled in this study were diagnosed with peripheral artery disease. Therefore, ABPI >0.9 in such patients should evoke a possible association with arterial stiffness. Similar to literature data on positive association between arterial stiffness and HbA1c, we detected a positive correlation between ABPI and HbA1c. In our study, all participants had ABPI >1. This finding may be related to arterial stiffness. All three groups of patients had mean BMI >30 kg/m². Obesity in most participants might explain an increased arterial stiffness. On the other hand, higher ABPI in prediabetic patients compared to the control group may be related to increased risk of arterial stiffness in this early stage.

Inflammation and oxidative stress are important mechanisms of development and progression of atherosclerosis [34]. Monocytes are essential in this process. Activated monocytes interact with endothelium and cause overexpression of proinflammatory cytokines and adhesion molecules. Monocytes transform into macrophages on arterial vascular wall and create foamy cells as a result of oxidized low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol digestion [35]. High-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol molecules prevent migration of macrophages and cause removal of oxidized cholesterol from these cells. Recent studies also indicated the role of HDL cholesterol in control of activation, adhesion and inflammation of monocytes [36]. In addition to anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects of HDL cholesterol molecules, the last ones increase expression of endothelial nitric oxide synthase and enables vascular relaxation [37]. Therefore, monocytes present a pro-inflammatory and pro-oxidant effect. However, HDL cholesterol acts as a reverse factor during these reactions. MHR may be considered as an indicator of inflammation and oxidative stress [38, 39].

We also showed that MHR was significantly increased in prediabetic and diabetic patients. We think that oxidative stress and inflammation may be important indicators of pathophysiology of diabetes.

Conclusion

The present study has reviewed the indicators of subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients. Although increased BPI and CIMT as indicators of subclinical atherosclerosis were observed in both diabetic and prediabetic patients, we detected a significant increase of ABPI in diabetic patients only. We also showed that MHR as an indicator of oxidative stress and inflammation was significantly higher in prediabetic and diabetic patients.

Limitations

The present study has some limitations. Firstly, the study was conducted in one center with small sample size. Secondly, we could not check possible daily changes in blood pressure measurements. Further prospective studies on this issue are needed.

This study did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or non-profit sector.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Литература / References:

Grundy SM. Pre-diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular risk. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2012;59(7): 635-643.
Xing FY, et al. Association of prediabetes by fasting glucose and/or haemoglobin A1c levels with subclinical atherosclerosis and impaired renal function: observations from the Dallas Heart Study. Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research. 2014;11(1):11-18.
Bauer M, et al. Carotid intima-media thickness as a biomarker of subclinical atherosclerosis. Swiss Medical Weekly. 2012;142: w13705.
Bhinder HPS, Kamble T. The study of carotid intima-media thickness in prediabetes and its correlation with cardiovascular risk factors. Journal of Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences University. 2018;13(2):79-82.
Mahat R, et al. Oxidative DNA damage and carotid intima media thickness as predictors of cardiovascular disease in prediabetic subjects. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease. 2018;5(1):15.
Sibal L, Agarwal SC, Home PD. Carotid intima-media thickness as a surrogate marker of cardiovascular disease in diabetes. Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy. 2011;4:23-34.
Kabul HK, et al. Ankle-brachial Index, Peripheral Arterial Disease, and Diabetic Retinopathy. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health. 2012;45(2):122-124.
Bosevski M, Peovska I. Clinical Usefulness of Assessment of Ankle — Brachial Index and Carotid Stenosis in Type 2 Diabetic Population — Three-Year Cohort Follow-Up of Mortality. Angiology. 2013;64(1):64-68.
Naharci MI, Katipoglu B. Relationship between blood pressure index and cognition in older adults. Clinical and Experimental Hypertension. 2020:1-6.
Association AD. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(Suppl 1):67-74.
Ates H, et al. A novel clinical index for the assessment of RVD in acute pulmonary embolism: Blood pressure index. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2017;35(10):1400-1403.
Ates H, et al. Choice of marker for assessment of RV dysfunction in acute pulmonary embolism. Herz. 2017;42(8):758-765.
Fuller J, et al. Coronary-heart-disease risk and impaired glucose tolerance. The Whitehall study. The Lancet. 1980;315(8183): 1373-1376.
Fuller JH, et al. Mortality from coronary heart disease and stroke in relation to degree of glycaemia: the Whitehall study. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;287(6396):867-870.
Mahat RK, et al. Cross-sectional correlates of oxidative stress and inflammation with glucose intolerance in prediabetes. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews. 2019;13(1):616-621.
O’Keefe JH, Bell DS. Postprandial hyperglycemia/hyperlipidemia (postprandial dysmetabolism) is a cardiovascular risk factor. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2007;100(5):899-904.
Agarwal A, et al. Assessment of oxidative stress and inflammation in prediabetes — A hospital based cross-sectional study. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews. 2016;10(2):123-126.
Haffner SM, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors in confirmed prediabetic individuals: does the clock for coronary heart disease start ticking before the onset of clinical diabetes? Jama. 1990;263(21): 2893-2898.
Altin C, et al. Assessment of subclinical atherosclerosis by carotid intima-media thickness and epicardial adipose tissue thickness in prediabetes. Angiology. 2016;67(10):961-969.
Hamur H, et al. Total bilirubin levels predict subclinical atherosclerosis in patients with prediabetes. Angiology. 2016;67(10):909-915.
Parildar H, et al. Carotid artery intima media thickness and HsCRP; predictors for atherosclerosis in prediabetic patients? Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences. 2013;29(2):495-499.
Al-Aubaidy HA, Jelinek HF. Oxidative stress and triglycerides as predictors of subclinical atherosclerosis in prediabetes. Redox Report. 2014;19(2):87-91.
Yildiz G, et al. Evaluation of association between atherogenic index of plasma and intima‐media thickness of the carotid artery for subclinic atherosclerosis in patients on maintenance hemodialysis. Hemodialysis International. 2013;17(3):397-405.
Bots ML, et al. Common carotid intima-media thickness as an indicator of atherosclerosis at other sites of the carotid artery the Rotterdam Study. Annals of Epidemiology. 1996;6(2):147-153.
Hunt KJ, et al. Elevated carotid artery intima-media thickness levels in individuals who subsequently develop type 2 diabetes. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2003;23(10):1845-1850.
Potier L, et al. Use and utility of ankle brachial index in patients with diabetes. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2011;41(1):110-116.
Clairotte C, et al. Automated ankle-brachial pressure index measurement by clinical staff for peripheral arterial disease diagnosis in nondiabetic and diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(7):1231-1236.
Bundó M, et al. Asymptomatic peripheral arterial disease in type 2 diabetes patients: A 10-year follow-up study of the utility of the ankle brachial index as a prognostic marker of cardiovascular disease. Annals of Vascular Surgery. 2010;24(8):985-993.
Xu D, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the ankle-brachial index to diagnose peripheral artery disease: A structured review. Vascular Medicine. 2010;15(5):361-369.
Polenova N, Iavelov I, Gratsianskiĭ N. Factors associated with low ankle-brachial index in patients with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes. Kardiologiia. 2009;49(9):9-16.
Faghihimani E, et al. Evaluation of peripheral arterial disease in prediabetes. International Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2014;5(9):1099-1105.
Rabkin SW, Chan SH, Sweeney C. Ankle-brachial index as an indicator of arterial stiffness in patients without peripheral artery disease. Angiology. 2012;63(2):150-154. First Published June 15, 2011.
Gateva A, et al. Endothelial dysfunction and intima media thickness are selectively related to the different carbohydrate disturbances across the glucose continuum. Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry. 2019;125(5):430-434.
Le N-A. Inflammation, oxidative stress, and atherosclerosis. Current Opinion in Lipidology. 2004;15(2):227-229.
Ghattas A, et al. Monocytes in coronary artery disease and atherosclerosis: where are we now? Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2013;62(17):1541-1551.
Yvan-Charvet L, et al. ATP-binding cassette transporters and HDL suppress hematopoietic stem cell proliferation. Science. 2010; 328(5986):1689-1693.
Kuvin JT, et al. A novel mechanism for the beneficial vascular effects of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol: enhanced vasorelaxation and increased endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression. American Heart Journal. 2002;144(1):165-172.
Katipoğlu Z, et al. May Monocyte/HDL Cholesterol Ratio (MHR) and Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) Be an Indicator of Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in Patients with Keratoconus? Ocular Immunology and Inflammation. 2020;28(4):632-636.
Katipoğlu B, et al. Relationship Between Monocyte/HDL Cholesterol Ratio and Urinary Protein Excretion in Patients with Primary Hypertension with Reverse Dipper Pattern. Turkish Journal of Nephrology. 2019;28(1):54-61.

ЦЕЛЬ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ

МАТЕРИАЛ И МЕТОДЫ

РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ

ВЫВОД