Departmental sources Background: The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and prognosis of coronary heart disease (CHD) in young patients. Material/Methods: We included 972 CHD patients (£50 years old) with coronary artery stenting who were prospectively enrolled and followed for 1 year. Clinical characteristics, risk factors, and predictors of outcomes were evaluated. Results: The prevalence of current smoker, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia and positive family history of CHD were 18.9%, 34.3%, 14.5%, 4.4%, and 44.2%, respectively. Most of the patients underwent coronary stenting due to stable angina (48.8%) and unstable angina (UA; 48.1%). After 1-year follow-up, 64 patients (6.6%) experienced clinical outcomes and the most common event was UA (n=56). Compared to patients without clinical outcomes, those with outcomes were more likely to be male, have higher systolic blood pressure, more likely to have hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and more likely to be presented as unstable angina. Multivariate regression analysis showed only age (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12 and 95% confidence interval [

BackgroundLipoprotein associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) is a novel biomarker for cardiovascular risk prediction. Whether increased Lp-PLA2 level is associated with re-stenosis after stent-placement is unclear.MethodsTotally 326 participants eligible for stent-placement were enrolled and divided into two groups according to baseline Lp-PLA2 levels (named normal and elevated groups). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between normal and elevated groups. The relationships between Lp-PLA2 and other risk factors with re-stenosis were evaluated.ResultsOnly the between-group difference of Lp-PLA2 was significant (123.2 ± 33.6 ng/mL vs 336.8 ± 85.4 ng/mL, P < 0.001) while other demographic and clinical characteristics between these two groups were comparable. Approximately 55.1% and 58.5% of participants in normal and elevated groups presented with acute coronary syndrome, and the percentage of tri-vessels stenoses was significantly higher in elevated group (40.8% vs 32.1%, P = 0.016). Nearly 96.0% and 94.0% of participants in normal and elevated Lp-PLA2 groups were placed with drug-eluting stents, and the others were with bare-metal stents. After 1 year’s follow-up, the incidence of clinical end-points was comparable (13.3% vs 15.4%, P = 0.172). Nevertheless, the incidence of re-stenosis was marginally higher in elevated Lp-PLA2 group (8.5% versus 4.6%, P = 0.047). With multivariate analysis, after adjustment for other risk factors, Lp-PLA2 remained an independent predictor for re-stenosis with a hazard ratio of 1.140. No synergistic effect between Lp-PLA2 and other risk factors for re-stenosis was found.ConclusionIncreased Lp-PLA2 level is associated with an increased risk of re-stenosis. Lp-PLA2 assessment may be useful in predicting subjects who are at increased risk for re-stenosis.

In subjects with dyslipidemia and overweight/obese, atorvastatin plus metformin may confer additive benefits through reducing leukocyte ROCK2 concentration.

IntroductionThe aim was to evaluate the association of serum total cholesterol (TC) level and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with heart failure (HF) caused by coronary heart disease (CHD).Material and methodsA total of 236 participants were enrolled. Participants were divided into severely reduced (≤ 35%) and moderately reduced (> 35%) LVEF groups and the between-group difference was evaluated. Multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between LVEF and parameters of interest. Linear regression analysis was applied to analyze the odds ratio of per 1-SD increase in serum TC level for LVEF change.ResultsMean age was 57.3 years and males accounted for 58.1%. Mean serum TC level was 4.6 mmol/l, albumin (ALB) 33.6 g/l, and C-reactive protein (CRP) 11.4 mg/l. Mean LVEF was 38.3%. Compared to high-reduced LVEF group, participants in moderate-reduced LVEF group had significantly higher TC (4.8 ±0.9 mmol/l vs. 4.4 ± 0.7 mmol/l) and ALB (35.8 ±6.7 g/l vs. 31.4 ±6.0 g/l) but lower CRP (9.6 ±4.7 mg/l vs. 14.2 ±7.0 mg/l) levels (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Increased TC and ALB levels were associated with higher LVEF, and increased CRP level was associated with lower LVEF. After adjusted for CRP, although per 1-SD increase in TC level was still associated with an increment in 4 % in LVEF, it did not achieve achieve statistic significance.ConclusionsIn patients with HF caused by CHD, higher serum TC level appeared to be associated with higher LVEF, which might be associated with systemic inflammation improvement.

The present study is to investigate whether spironolactone is better than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) for blood pressure (BP) control and arterial stiffness improvement. Five-hundred-sixty-six uncontrolled hypertensive patients with 2 different classes of antihypertensive medications treatment were enrolled. Spironolactone or HCTZ was randomly prescribed for 4 weeks. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV) was measured at baseline and after 4 weeks’ of spironolactone or HCTZ treatment. Between-group differences were evaluated, and logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association of cf-PWV increase and incident resistant hypertension. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed between spironolactone and HCTZ groups. After 4 weeks’ treatment, both systolic BP and cf-PWV were reduced more profoundly in spironolactone group versus HCTZ group (P < .05). Pearson and Spearman correlation analysis showed that age, diabetes mellitus, and HCTZ were positively correlated with cf-PWV, while spironolactone was negatively with cf-PWV. Logistic regression analysis indicated that per 1-standard deviation increase in cf-PWV was associated with 92% higher incidence of resistant hypertension. After adjusted for spironolactone, no significant association between cf-PWV increase and incident resistant hypertension was observed, indicating that the adverse effect of arterial stiffness on resistant hypertension development might be reversed by spironolactone treatment. In summary, uncontrolled hypertensive patients with spironolactone treatment appear to have better BP control and arterial stiffness improvement.