Age and gender differences of endothelial function in 4739 healthy adults: The HUNT3 fitness study

109Citations
Citations of this article
95Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aims: Endothelial dysfunction is an important marker for prognosis in patients with coronary heart disease. However, there are no reference values for endothelial function in a healthy population. Our aim was to determine the distribution of flow-mediated dilation (FMD) values by gender and age in healthy adults. Methods: FMD was measured by ultrasound during reactive hyperaemia in the brachial artery of 4739 adults aged 2089 years, who were free from self-reported cardiovascular or pulmonary disease. Differences in FMD across age and gender were analysed by multiple linear regression. Results: Total mean ± SD FMD was 4.8 ± 4.2%, with corresponding estimates of 4.3 ± 3.9% for men and 5.3 ± 4.5% for women (p<0.001). In total, 17% had FMD ≤0%, indicating endothelial dysfunction. FMD decreased with increasing age in both genders up to 70 years for men and 80 for women (p<0.001). In women, age-related decline in FMD was steepest after age 45; in men, a steady decline after age 30. In men 80 years and older, FMD was higher than in men aged 5079 years. Conclusions: The distribution of FMD in this study is representative of the respective age and gender groups of a healthy population and may be a useful reference for future studies. The high proportion of endothelial dysfunction came as a surprise. Its age and gender distribution suggest that FMD <0% precedes cardiovascular disease and that it may be a powerful non-invasive biomarker for identifying high-risk individuals. © 2012 The European Society of Cardiology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Skaug, E. A., Aspenes, S. T., Oldervoll, L., Mørkedal, B., Vatten, L., Wisløff, U., & Ellingsen, Ø. (2013). Age and gender differences of endothelial function in 4739 healthy adults: The HUNT3 fitness study. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 20(4), 531–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487312444234

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free