4.1 Article

Lipid Levels Including Oxidized LDL in Women with History of Preeclampsia

期刊

HYPERTENSION IN PREGNANCY
卷 29, 期 1, 页码 93-100

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/10641950902968593

关键词

Preeclampsia; Cardiovascular; Lipid profile; oxLDL

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [POCTI/SAU-ESP/60514/2004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Preeclampsia (PE), a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality worldwide, is a hypertensive disorder of unknown aetiology characterized by proteinuria, coagulation abnormalities and different systemic manifestations. Since there are no studies regarding the evaluation of oxidized LDL (oxLDL) in women with a history of PE, we focused on the evaluation of lipid profile and oxLDL plasma concentration several years after pregnancy to see if these women have any modifications in these parameters that may be linked to the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the future. Ninety women with a history of PE and 60 controls in a median interval of 6 years after pregnancy were recruited. Plasma oxLDL levels were measured using a two-site enzyme immunoassay. Concentration of cholesterol, triglycerides (TG), HDL-cholesterol (HDLc) and LDL-cholesterol (LDLc) were measured by automated enzymatic assays. To evaluate apoA and apoB levels automated immunoturbidimetric assays were used. In the group of women with a history of PE, gestational age at delivery was significantly earlier in comparison with the control group, whereas birth weight was significantly lower and there were more caesarean sections. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were significantly higher in women with a history of PE than in the control group. Significantly higher obesity anthropometric markers (BMI and waist-to-hip ratio) were found in women with a history of PE. As consistent with other authors' findings, blood pressure was higher in these women, but lipid profile did not seem to play a role in the increased risk of cardiovascular disease.

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

4.1
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