Why the study?
Does the 460Trp allele of the ADD1 gene impair endothelium-dependent vasodilation in untreated hypertensive patients?
Does the 460Trp allele of the ADD1 gene impair endothelium-dependent vasodilation in untreated hypertensive patients?
The 460Trp allele of the ADD1 gene is strongly associated with impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation in untreated essential hypertensives, suggesting a genetic mechanism for increased cardiovascular risk.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
460Trp allele associated with impaired vasodilation in hypertensives; hypothesis-generating, should not yet change practice.
OBJECTIVES: Endothelium-dependent vasodilatation is impaired in essential hypertension. Besides traditional and emerging cardiovascular risk factors, genetic factors may also promote deleterious alterations of endothelial physiology. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between the 460Trp allele of ADD1 and endothelium-dependent vasodilation in 110 never-treated hypertensive patients. METHODS: Forearm blood flow (FBF) was measured during intra-arterial infusion of acetylcholine (ACh) and sodium nitroprusside (SNP) at increasing doses. Analysis of endothelium-dependent and endothelium-independent vasodilation was tested according to ADD1 genotype. RESULTS: The FBF values at the three incremental doses of ACh were 5.22 +/- 0.24 (+76%), 8.64 +/- 0.45 (+193%) and 14.74 +/- 0.71 (+395%) ml/100 ml of tissue per min for Gly460Gly and 4.63 +/- 0.20 (+51%), 6.84 +/- 0.36 (+123%) and 11.22 +/- 3.8 (+269%) ml/100 ml of tissue per min for 460Trp. Thus, ACh-stimulated FBF was significantly reduced in hypertensive subjects carrying the 460Trp allele of ADD1 (P < 0.001). SNP-stimulated FBF was not affected by ADD1. CONCLUSIONS: The main finding in this study was that in essential hypertensives the 460Trp allele of ADD1 is strongly associated with an impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation, a powerful predictor of cardiovascular risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perticone et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: