4.3 Article

Inflammatory Activation and Left Ventricular Mass in Essential Hypertension

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 444-450

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.369

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health Fondo de Investigociones Sanitarias del Instituto Carlos III

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Inflammation is an independent risk factor for high blood pressure, and as a consequence inflammatory cytokines could be related with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). We sought to assess the association and predictive role of different cytokine levels with LVH in a group of patients with essential hypertension (HT). METHODS We studied 251 asymptomatic hypertensive patients (142 with LVH and 109 without LVH), referred from 11 hospitals. A routine physical examination, laboratory analyses, and echo-Doppler study were performed. Plasma soluble tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptors (sTNF-R1 and sTNF-R2), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1 ra) were centrally determined. RESULTS Hypertensive patients with LVH had higher inflammatory cytokine levels than the group without hypertrophy (P < 0.001). Multivariate linear regression reported that sTNF-R1 (P < 0.01) was an independent predictor of left ventricular mass index (LVMI). All cytokines had significant area under the curves for detection of LVH, but sTNF-R1 has the highest area, 0.71 +/- 0.03 (P < 0.001). Finally, prevalence of LVH was increased in the group of patients with higher cytokine levels, and logistic regression analysis showed that sTNF-R1 (odds ratio = 2.59, 95% Cl of 1.14-5.87) was an independent predictor of LVH. CONCLUSIONS Cytokine levels were significantly correlated with LVMI in hypertensive patients. The sTNF-R1 was an independent predictor of LVMI. Plasma sTNF-R1 concentrations could be a predictive factor of LVH in patients with essential HT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available