| Literature DB >> 25221629 |
Essam Eldin Mohamed Nour Eldin1, Abdullah Almarzouki2, Adel Mohamed Assiri1, Osman Mohammed Elsheikh3, Badreldin Elsonni Abdalla Mohamed4, Abdullatif Taha Babakr5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oxidative modification of low density lipoproteins (LDL) convert these native particles into pathogenic, immunogenic and atherogenic particles. Factors enhance LDL oxidation are poorly understood, especially in conditions of hyperglycemia. The present study was conducted to investigate which metabolic conditions are associated with the promotion of LDL oxidation in different glycemic situations.Entities:
Keywords: Malondialdehyde (MDA); Oxidized LDL (Ox-LDL); Prediabetics; Total antioxidant capacity
Year: 2014 PMID: 25221629 PMCID: PMC4161898 DOI: 10.1186/1758-5996-6-94
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr ISSN: 1758-5996 Impact factor: 3.320
Characteristics and glucose tolerance of the studied groups
| Control | IGT | Type2 DM |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| 34 ± 9 | 39 ± 10 | 42 ± 9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 28.3 ± 4.9 | 31.1 ± 5.1 | 30.2 ± 5.1 | < 0.001 | < 0.01 |
|
| 124 ± 15 | 129 ± 12 | 136 ± 13 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 |
|
| 82 ± 11 | 83 ± 8 | 89 ± 11 | NS | < 0.001 |
|
| 91 ± 10 | 116 ± 21 | 193 ± 65 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 109 ± 18 | 167 ± 19 | 298 ± 79 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 5.0 ± 0.6 | 6.7 ± 1.2 | 8.5 ± 2.1 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 31.1 ± 7.1 | 49.7 ± 12.8 | 69.4 ± 22.5 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
Results are expressed as mean ± SD.
: p value when control group was compared to IGT group.
: p value when control group was compared to Type2 DM group.
not significant.
Abbreviations: BMI Body mass index, SBP Systolic blood pressure, DBP Diastolic blood pressure, FBS Fasting blood sugar, 2hrPP Two hour post-prandial blood sugar.
Lipids profile of the studied groups
| Control | IGT | Type2 DM |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| 200 ± 53 | 240 ± 59 | 262 ± 79 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 160 ± 78 | 213 ± 118 | 248 ± 158 | <0.01 | < 0.001 |
|
| 48.7 ± 16 | 53.2 ± 17 | 46.5 ± 16 | NS | NS |
|
| 118 ± 31 | 141 ± 38 | 153 ± 49 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| 2.60 ± 0.9 | 2.92 ± 1.3 | 3.53 ± 1.4 | NS | < 0.001 |
Results are expressed as mean ± SD.
: p value when control group was compared to IGT group.
: p value when control group was compared to Type2 DM group.
not significant.
Abbreviations: CHOL Cholesterol, TG Triglycerides, HDL-C High density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C Low density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Oxidative stress parameters of the studied groups
| Control | IGT | Type2 DM |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| 73.5 ± 27.5 | 108.7 ± 23.7 | 143.5 ± 21.9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||||
|
| 4.46 ± 1.98 | 5.77 ± 2.50 | 7.91 ± 3.17 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||||
|
| 1.384 ± 0.688 | 1.000 ± 0.397 | 0.817 ± 0.248 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||||
|
| 25.12 ± 11 | 31.81 ± 11 | 42.40 ± 25 | < 0.01 | < 0.001 |
Results are expressed as mean ± SD.
: p value when control group was compared to IGT group.
: p value when control group was compared to Type2 DM group.
Abbreviations: Ox-LDL Oxidized low density lipoprotein, MDA Malondialdehyde, TAC Total antioxidant capacity.
Correlations between ox-LDL and selected parameters in the whole population of the study
| Parameter | Pearson correlation with Ox-LDL |
|---|---|
|
| 0.42** |
|
| 0.21** |
|
| 0.56** |
|
| 0.62** |
|
| 0.60** |
|
| 0.32** |
|
| 0.16* |
|
| 0.36** |
|
| 0.44** |
|
| -0.51** |
|
| 0.59** |
|
| 0.28** |
*: significant at 0.01 level.
**: significant at 0.001 level.
Figure 1Correlation between Ox-LDL and HbA1c in all studied groups.
Figure 2Correlation between Ox-LDL and LDL in all studied groups.
Figure 3Correlation between Ox-LDL and total antioxidant capacity. a: in all studied groups. b: in control group. c: in IGT group. d: in type-2 DM group.
Figure 4Correlation between Ox-LDL and BMI in all studied groups.