1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Endothelitis profile in acute heart failure and cardiogenic shock patients: Endocan as a potential novel biomarker and putative therapeutic target

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims: Inflammation-driven endothelitis seems to be a hallmark of acute heart failure (AHF) and cardiogenic shock (CS). Endocan, a soluble proteoglycan secreted by the activated endothelium, contributes to inflammation and endothelial dysfunction, but has been scarcely explored in human AHF. We aimed to evaluate serum (S-Endocan) and urinary endocan (U-Endocan) profiles in AHF and CS patients and to correlate them with biomarkers/parameters of inflammation, endothelial activation, cardiovascular dysfunction and prognosis.

          Methods: Blood and spot urine were collected from patients with AHF ( n = 23) or CS ( n = 25) at days 1–2 (admission), 3-4 and 5-8 and from controls (blood donors, n = 22) at a single time point. S-Endocan, U-Endocan, serum IL-1β, IL-6, tumour necrosis factor-α (S-TNF-α), intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (S-ICAM-1), vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (S-VCAM-1) and E-selectin were determined by ELISA or multiplex immunoassays. Serum C-reactive protein (S-CRP), plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (P-BNP) and high-sensitivity troponin I (P-hs-trop I), lactate, urea, creatinine and urinary proteins, as well as prognostic scores (APACHE II, SAPS II) and echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were also evaluated.

          Results: Admission S-Endocan was higher in both patient groups, with CS presenting greater values than AHF (AHF and CS vs. Controls, p < 0.001; CS vs. AHF, p < 0.01). Admission U-Endocan was only higher in CS patients ( p < 0.01 vs. Controls). At admission, S-VCAM-1, S-IL-6 and S-TNF-α were also higher in both patient groups but there were no differences in S-E-selectin and S-IL-1β among the groups, nor in P-BNP, S-CRP or renal function between AHF and CS. Neither endocan nor other endothelial and inflammatory markers were reduced during hospitalization ( p > 0.05). S-Endocan positively correlated with S-VCAM-1, S-IL-6, S-CRP, APACHE II and SAPS II scores and was positively associated with P-BNP in multivariate analyses. Admission S-Endocan raised in line with LVEF impairment ( p = 0.008 for linear trend).

          Conclusion: Admission endocan significantly increases across AHF spectrum. The lack of reduction in endothelial and inflammatory markers throughout hospitalization suggests a perpetuation of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. S-Endocan appears to be a biomarker of endothelitis and a putative therapeutic target in AHF and CS, given its association with LVEF impairment and P-BNP and its positive correlation with prognostic scores.

          Related collections

          Most cited references86

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate.

          Equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are routinely used to assess kidney function. Current equations have limited precision and systematically underestimate measured GFR at higher values. To develop a new estimating equation for GFR: the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. Cross-sectional analysis with separate pooled data sets for equation development and validation and a representative sample of the U.S. population for prevalence estimates. Research studies and clinical populations ("studies") with measured GFR and NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), 1999 to 2006. 8254 participants in 10 studies (equation development data set) and 3896 participants in 16 studies (validation data set). Prevalence estimates were based on 16,032 participants in NHANES. GFR, measured as the clearance of exogenous filtration markers (iothalamate in the development data set; iothalamate and other markers in the validation data set), and linear regression to estimate the logarithm of measured GFR from standardized creatinine levels, sex, race, and age. In the validation data set, the CKD-EPI equation performed better than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation, especially at higher GFR (P < 0.001 for all subsequent comparisons), with less bias (median difference between measured and estimated GFR, 2.5 vs. 5.5 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)), improved precision (interquartile range [IQR] of the differences, 16.6 vs. 18.3 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)), and greater accuracy (percentage of estimated GFR within 30% of measured GFR, 84.1% vs. 80.6%). In NHANES, the median estimated GFR was 94.5 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (IQR, 79.7 to 108.1) vs. 85.0 (IQR, 72.9 to 98.5) mL/min per 1.73 m(2), and the prevalence of chronic kidney disease was 11.5% (95% CI, 10.6% to 12.4%) versus 13.1% (CI, 12.1% to 14.0%). The sample contained a limited number of elderly people and racial and ethnic minorities with measured GFR. The CKD-EPI creatinine equation is more accurate than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation and could replace it for routine clinical use. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2019 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

              Circulation, 139(10)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Physiol
                Front Physiol
                Front. Physiol.
                Frontiers in Physiology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-042X
                11 August 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 965611
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Departamento de Biomedicina—Unidade de Farmacologia e Terapêutica , Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto (FMUP) , Porto, Portugal
                [2] 2 Centro de Investigação Farmacológica e Inovação Medicamentosa , Universidade do Porto (MedInUP) , Porto, Portugal
                [3] 3 Serviço de Medicina Intensiva , Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João (CHUSJ) , Porto, Portugal
                [4] 4 Serviço de Farmacologia Clínica , CHUSJ , Porto, Portugal
                [5] 5 Serviço de Patologia Clínica , CHUSJ and EPIUnit , Instituto de Saúde Pública , Universidade do Porto , Porto, Portugal
                [6] 6 Departamento de Medicina da Comunidade , Informação e Decisão em Saúde , FMUP , Porto, Portugal
                [7] 7 CINTESIS—Centro de Investigação em Tecnologias e Serviços de Saúde , Porto, Portugal
                [8] 8 Laboratório de Farmacologia , Departamento de Ciências do Medicamento , Faculdade de Farmácia da Universidade do Porto , Porto, Portugal
                [9] 9 LAQV/REQUIMTE, Faculdade de Farmácia , Universidade do Porto , Porto, Portugal
                [10] 10 Departamento de Biomedicina—Unidade de Bioquímica , FMUP , Porto, Portugal
                [11] 11 Departamento de Cirurgia e Fisiologia , FMUP , Porto, Portugal
                [12] 12 Departamento de Medicina , FMUP , Porto, Portugal
                Author notes

                Edited by: Luciana Venturini Rossoni, University of São Paulo, Brazil

                Reviewed by: Jose Geraldo Mill, Federal University of Espirito Santo, Brazil

                Vicente Lahera, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain

                *Correspondence: Teresa Sousa, tsousa@ 123456med.up.pt
                [ † ]

                These authors have contributed equally to this work and share last authorship

                This article was submitted to Vascular Physiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology

                Article
                965611
                10.3389/fphys.2022.965611
                9407685
                36035482
                53375066-5b35-4a61-9a50-2d7adbf6c083
                Copyright © 2022 Reina-Couto, Silva-Pereira, Pereira-Terra, Quelhas-Santos, Bessa, Serrão, Afonso, Martins, Dias, Morato, Guimarães, Roncon-Albuquerque, Paiva, Albino-Teixeira and Sousa.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 09 June 2022
                : 05 July 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia , doi 10.13039/501100001871;
                Funded by: European Regional Development Fund , doi 10.13039/501100008530;
                Categories
                Physiology
                Original Research

                Anatomy & Physiology
                endocan,endothelitis,acute heart failure,cardiogenic shock,biomarker
                Anatomy & Physiology
                endocan, endothelitis, acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, biomarker

                Comments

                Comment on this article