2013
DOI: 10.15218/zjms.2013.0021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Association of pre-eclampsia with dyslipideamia

Abstract: Background and objective: Pre-eclampsia and eclampsia are claimed to be associated with disturbances in lipid profile. The purpose of this study was to determine any significant association between pre-eclampsia/eclampsia with lipid profile disturbances. Methods: This prospective study evaluated lipid profile in the second half of pregnancy in 38 pre-eclamptic, 21 ecalmptic woman and compared to 41 age matched healthy pregnant women served as a control for the period of February 2010 -January 2011. Results: Pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 18 publications
(17 reference statements)
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In comparison with the control, the level was lower in those with preeclampsia. Similar lipid profile variations in preeclampsia have been reported in other studies [13,14,24,25,26]. A meta-analysis of studies examining lipids in pregnancy documented "increased levels of total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein and other non-high-density lipoproteins with a significantly reduced level of high-density lipoprotein in the third trimesters in preeclampsia" [27].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…In comparison with the control, the level was lower in those with preeclampsia. Similar lipid profile variations in preeclampsia have been reported in other studies [13,14,24,25,26]. A meta-analysis of studies examining lipids in pregnancy documented "increased levels of total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein and other non-high-density lipoproteins with a significantly reduced level of high-density lipoprotein in the third trimesters in preeclampsia" [27].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%