2023
DOI: 10.1097/mca.0000000000001295
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of cardiac rehabilitation on inflammatory biomarkers in unstable ischemic heart disease patients following percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled study

Mohamad Awada,
Shahin Sanaei,
Mana Jameie
et al.

Abstract: Introduction Several blood inflammatory markers, such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), are linked to increased risk for cardiovascular diseases. This study aimed to evaluate these inflammatory markers after cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in patients with unstable ischemic heart disease (UIHD) who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
1

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It is worth mentioning that recent research has shown that CR can also reduce levels of selected inflammatory and endothelial dysfunction markers [43,44]. However, in our analysis, the alterations in selected blood markers did not yield any additional insight into the favorability of water-based exercise compared to land-based exercise, as no significant differences were observed between the two groups after the intervention.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 64%
“…It is worth mentioning that recent research has shown that CR can also reduce levels of selected inflammatory and endothelial dysfunction markers [43,44]. However, in our analysis, the alterations in selected blood markers did not yield any additional insight into the favorability of water-based exercise compared to land-based exercise, as no significant differences were observed between the two groups after the intervention.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 64%