1,720,993 research outputs found

    Comparison of lipid-lowering medications and risk for cardiovascular disease in diabetes

    No full text
    PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: To summarize available evidence regarding lipid-lowering interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. RECENT FINDINGS: Statins and non-statin therapies that act through upregulation of LDL receptor expression are associated with similar cardiovascular risk reduction per decrease in LDL cholesterol. In subjects with diabetes, with or without established cardiovascular disease, each 39 mg/dl reduction in LDL cholesterol observed with statins is associated with a 21% relative reduction in the risk of major coronary events at 5 years. Statins remain the first-line lipid-lowering agents for the management of dyslipidemia in individuals with diabetes; however, the addition of non-statin therapies to lower LDL cholesterol, such as ezetimibe and PCSK-9 inhibitors, to maximally tolerated statin therapy is recommended in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and baseline LDL cholesterol over 70 mg/dl. Recent data support even lower LDL cholesterol targets (< 55 mg/dl) to further reduce the risk of cardiovascular events especially in subjects with diabetes and documented cardiovascular disease

    Relationship of asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) with extent and functional severity of coronary atherosclerosis

    No full text
    Elevated serum levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) are associated with endothelial dysfunction and atherogenesis. In patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD), we assessed the correlation of serum ADMA levels with extent and functional significance of coronary atherosclerosis

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore