Resistant hypertension (RHT) is an important disease that causes an increase in cardiovascular risk, yet its etiology remains unclear. The authors aimed to investigate neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as an inflammation marker in patients with RHT. A total of 150 patients were included in the study and grouped according to their office and ambulatory blood pressure measurements. They were classified as having normotension (NT), controlled hypertension (CHT), or RHT. The RHT group had a significantly higher NLR than the CHT group (P=.03), and NLRs of both hypertension groups were significantly higher than those in the NT group (P<.001, for both). NLR and neutrophil count were found to be independent correlates for RHT in multivariate analysis (P<.001). NLR and neutrophil count are increased in RHT patients than both CHT and NT patients. This finding, which is defined for the first time in patients with RHT, may imply the importance of inflammation in blood pressure control.
After long years of using warfarin for atrial fibrillation, new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) became available for decreasing the risk of ischemic stroke. Our aim was to observe the physicians prescribing patterns of NOACs. This prospective observational study included patients using NOACs applying consecutively to our outpatient clinic. Physical examination was performed, and patient history, electrocardiogram, transthoracic echocardiography, and biochemical results were collected. Bleeding and ischemic stroke risk scores (HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc scores) were calculated. We evaluated patients' characteristics, risk factors, concomitant drug usage, and physicians' choices. The study consisted of 174 patients using NOACs (dabigatran 113 patients, rivaroxaban 61 patients), with a mean age of 70.7 ± 8.8 years. The mean HAS-BLED score was 1.74 ± 0.9 and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.7 ± 1.2. Fifty-three (30.4%) patients were prescribed low-dose NOAC according to the optimal dose, and 12 (6.8%) patients were prescribed high-dose NOAC according to the optimal dose. We compared optimal dose and undertreatment groups to find out if there was any predicting factor for physicians to use low dose of NOACs, but there was no significant difference between the two groups for age, sex, concomitant chronic disease, and CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. NOACs were prescribed to patients mostly with high CHA2DS2-VASc score and low HAS-BLED score. Low-dose NOAC usage according to the optimal dose was frequent. Frequent coagulation monitoring and drug incompliance are big deficiencies at atrial fibrillation in use of warfarin. NOACs overcome these difficulties; however, physicians' hesitation to use NOACs with the optimal dosage may be another limitation in real-world practice.
Background and objectives: In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) has a prognostic value for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including stroke, re-hospitalization, and short-term all-cause mortality at 6 months, in aortic stenosis (AS) patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Materials and Methods: A total of 120 patients who underwent TAVI due to severe AS were retrospectively included in our study. The main outcome of the study was MACEs and short-term all-cause mortality at 6 months. Results: The SII was found to be higher in TAVI patients who developed MACEs than in those who did not develop them. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that the SII (HR: 1.002, 95%CI: 1.001–1.003, p < 0.01) was an independent predictor of MACEs in AS patients after TAVI. The optimal value of the SII for MACEs in AS patients following TAVI was >1.056 with 94% sensitivity and 96% specificity (AUC (the area under the curve): 0.960, p < 0.01). We noted that the AUC value of SII in predicting MACEs was significantly higher than the AUC value of the C-reactive protein (AUC: 0.960 vs. AUC: 0.714, respectively). Conclusions: This is the first study to show that high pre-procedural SII may have a predictive value for MACEs and short-term mortality in AS patients undergoing TAVI.
Objective To investigate whether inflammation based scores including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) and monocyte to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio (MHR) predict the slow flow (SF)/no-reflow (NR) phenomenon comparatively in patients with non–ST-elevated Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods Current study is retrospective designed and includes 426 NSTEMI patients (mean age of 56.8 ± 11.4 years). The patients were grouped into non slow flow/no-reflow and slow flow/no-reflow groups according to postintervention thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade. Results The slow flow/no-reflow group had significantly higher MHR and lower LMR values than the non slow flow/no-reflow group (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01, respectively). Lower LMR [odds ratio (OR): 0.659, P < 0.01] and higher MHR (OR: 1.174, P = 0.04) were independent predictors of slow flow/no-reflow phenomenon in model 1 and 2 multivariate analyses, respectively. Furthermore, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (OR: 0.934, P = 0.01; OR: 0.930, P < 0.01), smoking (OR: 2.279, P = 0.03; OR: 2.118, P = 0.04), Syntax score (1.038, P = 0.04; 1.046, P = 0.01) and high thrombus grade (OR: 7.839, P < 0.01; OR: 8.269, P < 0.01), independently predicted the slow flow/no-reflow development in both multivariate analysis models, respectively. The predictive performance of LMR and MHR was not different (P = 0.88), but both predictive powers were superior to NLR (P < 0.01 and P = 0.03, respectively). Conclusion The MHR and LMR may be useful inflammatory biomarkers for identifying high-risk individuals for the development of slow flow/no reflow in NSTEMI patients who underwent PCI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.