BACKGROUND: Endothelial damage/dysfunction has been related to hypertension in pregnancy, with implications in pregnancy outcomes. We hypothesised abnormal levels of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), circulating progenitor cells (CPCs) and plasma von Willebrand factor (vWf, a marker of endothelial damage/dysfunction) in pregnant women with hypertension, when compared to pregnant normotensives and non pregnant healthy controls. METHODS: Our study groups were 3rd trimester hypertensive pregnant women, 40 age matched normotensive pregnant women and 50 non pregnant healthy controls. CECs were measured by immunomagnetic separation using anti-CD146 monoclonal antibody coated beads. CPCs were defined using flow cytometry as CD133+/CD34+/CD45-. vWf was measured by ELISA. RESULTS: Hypertensive pregnant women had significantly higher CECs compared to normotensive pregnant women and non pregnant healthy controls (p < 0.001). CPCs were raised in the normotensive pregnant group compared with hypertensive pregnant and non pregnant healthy controls (p < 0.05). Both pregnant women groups had significantly higher vWF than the non pregnant controls. CEC levels correlated with both systolic and diastolic BP (r = 0.28, p < 0.005 and r = 0.31, p < 0.001, respectively). vWf correlated with CECs (r = 0.39, p < 0.0001). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed hypertension in pregnancy as an independent predictor of CEC levels (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension in pregnancy is characterised by abnormalities in the vascular endothelium, with abnormal CECs and vWf that correlate with BPs. This may reflect dysfunctional processes that are counteracted with reparative attempts at restoring endothelial integrity.
BACKGROUND: Endothelial damage/dysfunction has been related to hypertension in pregnancy, with implications in pregnancy outcomes. We hypothesised abnormal levels of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), circulating progenitor cells (CPCs) and plasma von Willebrand factor (vWf, a marker of endothelial damage/dysfunction) in pregnant women with hypertension, when compared to pregnant normotensives and non pregnant healthy controls. METHODS: Our study groups were 3rd trimester hypertensive pregnant women, 40 age matched normotensive pregnant women and 50 non pregnant healthy controls. CECs were measured by immunomagnetic separation using anti-CD146 monoclonal antibody coated beads. CPCs were defined using flow cytometry as CD133+/CD34+/CD45-. vWf was measured by ELISA. RESULTS:Hypertensive pregnant women had significantly higher CECs compared to normotensive pregnant women and non pregnant healthy controls (p < 0.001). CPCs were raised in the normotensive pregnant group compared with hypertensive pregnant and non pregnant healthy controls (p < 0.05). Both pregnant women groups had significantly higher vWF than the non pregnant controls. CEC levels correlated with both systolic and diastolic BP (r = 0.28, p < 0.005 and r = 0.31, p < 0.001, respectively). vWf correlated with CECs (r = 0.39, p < 0.0001). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed hypertension in pregnancy as an independent predictor of CEC levels (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:Hypertension in pregnancy is characterised by abnormalities in the vascular endothelium, with abnormal CECs and vWf that correlate with BPs. This may reflect dysfunctional processes that are counteracted with reparative attempts at restoring endothelial integrity.
Authors: N Bardin; F Anfosso; J M Massé; E Cramer; F Sabatier; A Le Bivic; J Sampol; F Dignat-George Journal: Blood Date: 2001-12-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: A Woywodt; A D Blann; T Kirsch; U Erdbruegger; N Banzet; M Haubitz; F Dignat-George Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Makrina D Savvidou; Qingzhong Xiao; Christine Kaihura; James M Anderson; Kypros H Nicolaides Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-02-15 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Christian Jung; Nicole Fischer; Michael Fritzenwanger; Hansjörg Thude; Markus Ferrari; Marlen Fabris; Bernhard R Brehm; Dagmar Barz; Hans R Figulla Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2008-11-25 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: M Boyer; L E Townsend; L M Vogel; J Falk; D Reitz-Vick; K T Trevor; M Villalba; P J Bendick; J L Glover Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: T Asahara; T Murohara; A Sullivan; M Silver; R van der Zee; T Li; B Witzenbichler; G Schatteman; J M Isner Journal: Science Date: 1997-02-14 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Mouhamed Djahoum Moussa; Cristina Santonocito; David Fagnoul; Katia Donadello; Olivier Pradier; Pascale Gaussem; Daniel De Backer; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-12-16 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Alexander Sedaghat; Jan-Malte Sinning; Kathrin Paul; Gregor Kirfel; Georg Nickenig; Nikos Werner Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-02-10 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Giorgio Ivan Russo; Sebastiano Cimino; Eugenia Fragalà; Salvatore Privitera; Sandro La Vignera; Rosita Condorelli; Aldo E Calogero; Mario Chisari; Tommaso Castelli; Vincenzo Favilla; Giuseppe Morgia Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Monica Lisi; Matthias Oelze; Saverio Dragoni; Andrew Liuni; Sebastian Steven; Mary-Clare Luca; Dirk Stalleicken; Thomas Münzel; Franco Laghi-Pasini; Andreas Daiber; John D Parker; Tommaso Gori Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Karen Sliwa; Dike Ojji; Katrin Bachelier; Michael Böhm; Albertino Damasceno; Simon Stewart Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Sarah A Hale; Gary J Badger; Carole McBride; Ronald Magness; Ira M Bernstein Journal: Pregnancy Hypertens Date: 2013-04-01 Impact factor: 2.899
Authors: Eneida Camarillo-Romero; Ma Victoria Dominguez-Garcia; Araceli Amaya-Chavez; Maria Del Socorro Camarillo-Romero; Juan Talavera-Piña; Gerardo Huitron-Bravo; Abraham Majluf-Cruz Journal: ISRN Endocrinol Date: 2012-07-25