4.6 Article

Acute and chronic effects of vitamin C on endothelial fibrinolytic function in overweight and obese adult humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 586, 期 14, 页码 3525-3535

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2008.151555

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We determined the effects of acute intra-arterial vitamin C administration and chronic oral vitamin C supplementation on the capacity of the endothelium to release t-PA in overweight and obese adults. Net endothelial t-PA release was determined in vivo in response to intrabrachial infusions of bradykinin and sodium nitroprusside in 33 sedentary adults: 10 normal-weight (BMI: 23.4 +/- 0.5 kg m(-2); 7M/3F); and 23 overweight/obese (BMI: 31.2 +/- 0.8 kg m(-2); 15M/8F). In 10 normal weight and eight overweight/obese adults the dose-response curves to bradykinin and sodium nitroprusside were repeated with a coinfusion of the antioxidant vitamin C (24 mg min(-1)). Seventeen of the 23 overweight/obese adults completed a 3 month chronic oral vitamin C (500 mg day(-1)) supplementation intervention. Intra-arterial administration of vitamin C significantly potentiated t-PA release in overweight/obese adults. Net release of t-PA was similar to 95% higher (P < 0.01) after (from -0.9 +/- 1.1 to 94.6 +/- 16.2 ng (100 ml tissue)(-1) min(-1)) compared with before (from -0.8 +/- 0.8 to 49.9 +/- 7.7 ng (100 ml tissue)(-1) min(-1)) vitamin C administration. Daily vitamin C supplementation significantly increased t-PA release in overweight/obese adults (from 0.2 +/- 0.9 to 48.2 +/- 6.5 ng (100 ml tissue)(-1) min(-1)) before supplementation versus (0.3 +/- 0.5 to 66.3 +/- 8.7 ng (100 ml tissue)(-1) min(-1)) after supplementation. These results indicate that the antioxidant vitamin C favourably affects the capacity of the endothelium to release t-PA in overweight/obese adults. Daily vitamin C supplementation represents an effective lifestyle intervention strategy for improving endothelial fibrinolytic regulation in this at-risk population.

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

4.6
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