ArticleScientific reports2024
Vascular function assessed by flow-mediated vasodilation and nitroglycerine-induced vasodilation in subjects with first-degree atrioventricular block.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
First-degree atrioventricular block (AVB) is a common electrocardiogram finding in clinical practice. Vascular dysfunction is associated with cardiovascular disease and events. There is no information on the association of AVB with vascular function. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the associations of PR interval with vascular function assessed in well-characterized subjects. A total of 2220 subjects were enrolled in this study. We evaluated endothelium-dependent vasodilatation assessed by flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) and endothelium-independent vasodilatation assessed by nitroglycerine-induced vasodilation (NID) in 106 subjects with first-degree AVB (70 men; mean age, 64.3 ± 12.9 years) and 1241 subjects with normal PR interval (531 men; mean age, 56.1 ± 13.9 years). Subjects with first-degree AVB had a lower FMD value than that in subjects with normal PR interval (3.5 ± 2.4% vs. 4.9 ± 3.3%, P < 0.001). FMD was significantly lower in subjects with first-degree AVB than in subjects with normal PR interval even after adjustment of confounding factors for assessment of endothelium-dependent vasodilatation (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.11-2.70; P = 0.015). Although NID was significantly lower in subjects with first-degree AVB than in subjects with normal PR interval (11.1 ± 6.0% vs. 13.6 ± 6.1%, P < 0.001), there was no significant difference in NID between the two groups in multivariate analysis (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 0.91-2.41; P = 0.117). Both endothelium-dependent and endothelium-independent vasodilation in the brachial artery are impaired in parallel with the prolongation of atrioventricular conduction. After adjustments of confounding factors for vascular function, first-degree AVB is associated with impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilatation but not with impaired endothelium-independent vasodilatation. From the aspect of vascular function, it is unlikely that first-degree AVB is an electrocardiography abnormality with a good prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.