4.4 Article

Indoxyl Sulfate Impairs Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Might Contribute to Vascular Dysfunction in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

期刊

KIDNEY & BLOOD PRESSURE RESEARCH
卷 41, 期 6, 页码 1025-1036

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000452604

关键词

Indoxyl sulfate; Endothelial progenitor cells; Vascular function; Chronic kidney disease

资金

  1. Mackay Memorial Hospital [MMH-104-06, MMH-105-06]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: Indoxyl sulfate (IS) is a protein-bound uremic toxin that accumulates in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We explored the effect of IS on human early endothelial progenitor cells (FPCs) and analyzed the correlation between serum IS levels and parameters of vascular function, including endothelial function in a CKD-based cohort. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 128 stable CKD patients was conducted. Flow-mediated dilation (FMD), pulse wave velocity (PWV), ankle brachial index, serum IS and other biochemical parameters were measured and analyzed. In parallel, the activity of early FPCs was also evaluated after exposure to IS. Results: In human FPCs, a concentration-dependent inhibitory effect of IS on chemotactic motility and colony formation was observed. Additionally, serum IS levels were significantly correlated with CKD stages. The total IS (T-IS) and free IS (F-IS) were strongly associated with age, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, blood pressure, PWV, blood urea nitrogen, creatine and phosphate but negatively correlated with FMD, the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hemoglobin, hematocrit, and calcium. A multivariate linear regression analysis also showed that FMD was significantly associated with IS after adjusting for other confounding factors. Conclusions: In humans, IS impairs early EPCs and was strongly correlated with vascular dysfunction. Thus, we speculate that this adverse effect of IS may partly result from the inhibition of early FPCs. (C) 2016 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

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

4.4
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