Key result
Higher cholesterol efflux capacity is linked to lower global atheroma burden.
Why the study?
The relation between in vitro cholesterol efflux capacity and the severity and extent of coronary artery disease in patients with and without type 2 diabetes was unclear.
Cross-Sectional (n=88)
Effect estimate: r = -0.23
p-value: p=<0.05
Lower in vitro efflux capacity was associated with greater CAD burden in diabetics; leaves open its value as a clinical biomarker.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relation between severity and extent of coronary artery disease (CAD) and in vitro cholesterol efflux capacity. DESIGN: This study consisted of 46 type 2 diabetic, and 42 nondiabetic men undergoing coronary angiography. Quantitative coronary angiography was used to estimate the severity, extent, and overall "atheroma burden" of CAD. The capacity of patient plasma to induce cholesterol efflux from cultured Fu5AH rat hepatoma cells was measured in vitro. RESULTS: In the combined study population (n = 88), there was a significant inverse correlation between efflux and global atheroma burden (r = -0.23, p < 0.05). In the diabetic group, the global atheroma burden index was independently associated both with cholesterol efflux and with LpA-I levels. However, in the nondiabetic CAD group this association was lost when efflux and LpA-I levels were included in the same model. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that efflux capacity was inversely associated with the severity and extent of CAD. In the diabetic group this association was independent of LpA-I levels, suggesting impaired antiatherogenic potential of these particles in type 2 diabetic patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pia Pajunen (2001) conducted a cross-sectional in Coronary Artery Disease (n=88). In vitro cholesterol efflux capacity was evaluated on Global atheroma burden (r = -0.23, p=<0.05). In vitro cholesterol efflux capacity was significantly inversely correlated with global atheroma burden (r = -0.23, p < 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: