Archives of medical research · 2022
Reduced Levels of Circulating Endothelial Cells and Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lopes José, Teixeira Manuel, Cavalcante Suiane, Gouveia Marisol, Duarte Ana, Ferreira Miriam, Simões Maria I, Conceição Maria, Ribeiro Ilda P, Gonçalves Ana C, Schmidt Cristine, de Jesus Bruno Bernardes, Almeida Ramiro, Viamonte Sofia, Santos Mário, Ribeiro Fernando
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endothelial dysfunction has been suggested as a potential mechanism contributing to the development and progression of heart failure (HF). Levels of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), and hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) have been recognized as useful markers of vascular damage and endothelial repair in response to tissue injury.
AIMS: To evaluate the circulating levels of EPCs, CECs, and HSPCs among patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
METHODS: In 82 individuals (42 patients with HFrEF and 42 age-matched subjects without established cardiovascular disease), peripheral blood was drawn and levels of EPCs, CECs, and HSPCs were quantified by flow cytometry.
RESULTS: Patients with HFrEF showed lower levels of circulating EPCs (5.28 × 10-3 ± 6.83 × 10-4% vs. 7.76 × 10-3 ± 4.91 × 10-4%, p ≤0.001) and CECs (5.11 × 10-3 ± 7.87 × 10-4% vs. 6.51 × 10-3 ± 5.21 × 10-4%, p = 0.005) when compared to the age-matched group. Circulating levels of HSPCs were not significantly different between groups (p = 0.590). Additionally, the number of EPCs and CECs was significantly higher in HFrEF patients with overweight/obesity (n = 24) compared to patients with normal weight (n = 17).
CONCLUSION: Circulating levels of EPCs and CECs were significantly decreased in patients with HFrEF in comparison to age-matched subjects without established cardiovascular disease, suggesting that the levels of CECs and EPCs may be potential biomarkers of the cellular response to vascular injury in patients with HFrEF.
AIMS: To evaluate the circulating levels of EPCs, CECs, and HSPCs among patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
METHODS: In 82 individuals (42 patients with HFrEF and 42 age-matched subjects without established cardiovascular disease), peripheral blood was drawn and levels of EPCs, CECs, and HSPCs were quantified by flow cytometry.
RESULTS: Patients with HFrEF showed lower levels of circulating EPCs (5.28 × 10-3 ± 6.83 × 10-4% vs. 7.76 × 10-3 ± 4.91 × 10-4%, p ≤0.001) and CECs (5.11 × 10-3 ± 7.87 × 10-4% vs. 6.51 × 10-3 ± 5.21 × 10-4%, p = 0.005) when compared to the age-matched group. Circulating levels of HSPCs were not significantly different between groups (p = 0.590). Additionally, the number of EPCs and CECs was significantly higher in HFrEF patients with overweight/obesity (n = 24) compared to patients with normal weight (n = 17).
CONCLUSION: Circulating levels of EPCs and CECs were significantly decreased in patients with HFrEF in comparison to age-matched subjects without established cardiovascular disease, suggesting that the levels of CECs and EPCs may be potential biomarkers of the cellular response to vascular injury in patients with HFrEF.