4.7 Article

Aortic stiffness is associated with cardiac function and cerebral small vessel disease in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: assessment by magnetic resonance imaging

期刊

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 1132-1138

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1655-4

关键词

Aorta; Magnetic resonance imaging; Type 1 diabetes mellitus; Heart; Brain

资金

  1. PREDICCt [01C-104]
  2. Netherlands Heart Foundation [NHS2003B136, NHS2007B81]
  3. Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation
  4. Dutch Kidney Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To evaluate, with the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), whether aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) is associated with cardiac left ventricular (LV) function and mass as well as with cerebral small vessel disease in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM). We included 86 consecutive type 1 DM patients (49 male, mean age 46.9 +/- 11.7 years) in a prospective, cross-sectional study. Exclusion criteria included aortic/heart disease and general MRI contra-indications. MRI of the aorta, heart and brain was performed for assessment of aortic PWV, as a marker of aortic stiffness, systolic LV function and mass, as well as for the presence of cerebral white matter hyperintensities (WMHs), microbleeds and lacunar infarcts. Multivariate linear or logistic regression was performed to analyse the association between aortic PWV and outcome parameters, with covariates defined as age, gender, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, BMI, smoking, DM duration and hypertension. Mean aortic PWV was 7.1 +/- 2.5 m/s. Aortic PWV was independently associated with LV ejection fraction ( = -0.406, P = 0.006), LV stroke volume ( = -0.407, P = 0.001), LV cardiac output ( = -0.458, P = 0.001), and with cerebral WMHs (P < 0.05). There were no independent associations between aortic stiffness and LV mass, cerebral microbleeds or lacunar infarcts. Aortic stiffness is independently associated with systolic LV function and cerebral WMHs in patients with type 1 DM.

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

4.7
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