Comparison of the effect of uric acid/albumin ratio on coronary slow flow with other inflammation-based markers.

IF 1.9 4区医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL

Biomarkers in medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI:10.2217/bmm-2023-0386

Kenan Toprak, Kaya Özen, Tolga Memioğlu, Mehmet İnanır, Mustafa Kaplangöray, Selahattin Akyol, Mustafa B Tascanov, Asuman Biçer, Recep Demirbağ

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many inflammation-based markers (IBMs) have been shown to be closely related to coronary slow flow (CSF), but the effect of the uric acid/albumin ratio (UAR) on CSF and its relationship with other IBMs are not clearly known. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of UAR and other IBMs on CSF. Methods: After the exclusion criteria, 126 patients with CSF detected on coronary angiography and 126 subjects with normal coronary flow as the control group were included in the study. Results: UAR was determined as an independent predictor for CSF. In addition, the UAR was superior to other IBMs in detecting CSF (p < 0.05 for all). Conclusion: This study is the first to investigate the effect of UAR on CSF in comparison with other IBMs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

尿酸/白蛋白比值对冠状动脉慢血流的影响与其他炎症指标的比较。

背景：许多基于炎症的标记物（IBMs）已被证明与冠状动脉慢血流（CSF）密切相关，但尿酸/白蛋白比值（UAR）对CSF的影响及其与其他IBMs的关系尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较尿酸/白蛋白比值和其他 IBM 对 CSF 的影响。研究方法在排除标准后，将 126 名在冠状动脉造影中发现 CSF 的患者和 126 名冠状动脉血流正常的受试者作为对照组。结果UAR 被确定为 CSF 的独立预测因子。此外，UAR 在检测 CSF 方面优于其他 IBMs（p 结论：UAR 在检测 CSF 方面优于其他 IBMs（p 结论：UAR 在检测 CSF 方面优于其他 IBMs（p 结论）：与其他 IBM 相比，本研究首次探讨了 UAR 对 CSF 的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Biomarkers in medicine 医学-医学：研究与实验

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

4.50%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Biomarkers are physical, functional or biochemical indicators of physiological or disease processes. These key indicators can provide vital information in determining disease prognosis, in predicting of response to therapies, adverse events and drug interactions, and in establishing baseline risk. The explosion of interest in biomarker research is driving the development of new predictive, diagnostic and prognostic products in modern medical practice, and biomarkers are also playing an increasingly important role in the discovery and development of new drugs. For the full utility of biomarkers to be realized, we require greater understanding of disease mechanisms, and the interplay between disease mechanisms, therapeutic interventions and the proposed biomarkers. However, in attempting to evaluate the pros and cons of biomarkers systematically, we are moving into new, challenging territory. Biomarkers in Medicine (ISSN 1752-0363) is a peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal delivering commentary and analysis on the advances in our understanding of biomarkers and their potential and actual applications in medicine. The journal facilitates translation of our research knowledge into the clinic to increase the effectiveness of medical practice. As the scientific rationale and regulatory acceptance for biomarkers in medicine and in drug development become more fully established, Biomarkers in Medicine provides the platform for all players in this increasingly vital area to communicate and debate all issues relating to the potential utility and applications. Each issue includes a diversity of content to provide rounded coverage for the research professional. Articles include Guest Editorials, Interviews, Reviews, Research Articles, Perspectives, Priority Paper Evaluations, Special Reports, Case Reports, Conference Reports and Company Profiles. Review coverage is divided into themed sections according to area of therapeutic utility with some issues including themed sections on an area of topical interest. Biomarkers in Medicine provides a platform for commentary and debate for all professionals with an interest in the identification of biomarkers, elucidation of their role and formalization and approval of their application in modern medicine. The audience for Biomarkers in Medicine includes academic and industrial researchers, clinicians, pathologists, clinical chemists and regulatory professionals.