Why the study?
Carotid plaque instability is a critical determinant of cerebrovascular events, yet its identification remains challenging.
Does serum MCP-1 level predict carotid plaque instability in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy?
Does serum MCP-1 level predict carotid plaque instability in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy?
Serum MCP-1 is a potential biomarker for carotid plaque instability, highlighting the role of obesity in promoting high-risk atherosclerotic features.
MCP-1 may flag unstable carotid plaques in overweight hypertensive patients; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Atherosclerosis is a major contributor to ischemic stroke. Carotid plaque instability is a critical determinant of cerebrovascular events, yet its identification remains challenging. One chemokine with well-documented proatherogenic properties is MCP-1, whose levels are elevated in patients with conditions such as hypertension, obesity, and atherosclerosis. This study evaluated the association between obesity, serum MCP-1 levels, and carotid plaque instability as determined by ultrasound gray-scale median (GSM) analysis in 77 patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy. Patients were classified by body mass index. Serum MCP-1 concentrations were measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique. Analyses were performed to explore relationships between clinical parameters, biochemical markers, and plaque stability. Increasing body weight was paralleled by higher MCP-1 levels and lower GSM values, indicative of unstable plaques. Moreover, logistic regression analysis identified MCP-1 as one of the independent predictors of plaque instability, particularly in overweight and hypertensive patients. These results indicate the potential usefulness of MCP-1 as a biomarker of carotid plaque instability, confirming the negative effect of obesity in promoting other known cardiovascular risk factors causing plaque instability in patients with carotid atherosclerosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Płoński et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: