Why the study?
Modifiable risk factors are central to coronary artery disease management, and oxidative stress is closely linked to atherogenesis throughout its progression.
Do cardiovascular risk factors correlate with induced blood oxidation in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Do cardiovascular risk factors correlate with induced blood oxidation in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Behavioral and metabolic risk factors such as smoking, hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes are significantly correlated with increased oxidative stress markers in patients with stable CAD.
Exposure on key modified risk factors, mainly hypercholesterolemia, arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus, is an essential component of successful management of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). As far as the concept of cardiovascular continuum goes, the predisposing behavioral factors that contribute to the development of these abnormal conditions include smoking, hypodynamia and obesity. Oxidative stress is closely associated with atherogenesis at every stage of progression. An open non-randomized prospective study is conducted. An observational group includes 89 patients with stable CAD. Key risk factors of cardiovascular diseases and their correlation with the values of induced blood oxidation were analyzed. Statistically significant (p < 0.05) positive correlation between hypercholesteremia and coefficient of oxidative activity (r = 0.22), smoking and initial rate of blood oxidation (r = 0.24), maximum rate of blood oxidation (r = 0.25), coefficient of oxidative activity (r = 0.24), diabetes mellitus and time of the initiation period (r = 0.25); negative correlation between smoking and time of the initiation period (r = –0.4) were detected. The results obtained show there is a correlation between a lifestyle and oxidative status of patients with stable CAD. Thus, influence on behavioral risk factors is the most important task of management of patients with cardiovascular pathology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shereshneva et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: