4.5 Article

Asymmetric Dimethylarginine (ADMA), Symmetric Dimethylarginine (SDMA), Arginine, and 8-Iso-Prostaglandin F2 alpha (8-iso-PGF2 alpha) Level in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

期刊

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
卷 16, 期 1, 页码 52-57

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1002/ibd.20994

关键词

endothelial dysfunction; oxidative stress; Crohn's disease; ulcerative colitis

资金

  1. Jagiellonian University, Medical College in Krakow

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Intestinal microvessels of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) show microvascular endothelial dysfunction. It may contribute to reduced perfusion, poor ulcer healing, and sustained chronic inflammation. The aim of the study was to assess endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress markers in patients with IBD. Methods: Serum levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA), arginine, and 8-iso-prostaglandin F2 alpha (8-iso-PGF2 alpha) were measured in 31 consecutive patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and 32 with Crohn's disease (CD). Apparently healthy subjects served as age- and sex-matched controls. Associations between these markers and the disease activity and laboratory variables were evaluated. Results: ADMA, SDMA, and 8-iso-PGF2 alpha levels were increased in the IBD group as compared to the control group and higher in patients with CD than UC (P < 0.05 for all comparisons). Arginine levels were similar in all the groups. In the CD and UC groups ADMA and SDMA showed positive correlation with 8-iso-PGF2 alpha (r from 0.47-0.67: P < 0.01 for all comparisons). ADMA and SDMA correlated positively with the CID activity (r = 0.4 P = 0.025: r = 0.4. P = 0.024, respectively) and the 8-iso-PGF2 alpha level correlated positively with the UC activity (r = 0.4, P = 0.026). Conclusions: This is the first study to show that in patients with IBD there is enhanced ADMA generation that might be associated with oxidative stress, and these effects are more pronounced in the CD group.

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

4.5
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