The Importance of Gamma‐Glutamyltransferase Activity in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Background In this study, we sought to investigate the relation of gamma‐glutamyltransferase (GGT) levels with the significance of coronary artery disease (CAD), clinical presentation, left ventricular (LV) function, and inflammatory activity. Methods A total of 235 patients (mean age: 60.1 ± 10.5 y...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical cardiology (Mahwah, N.J.) N.J.), 2009-04, Vol.32 (4), p.220-225
Hauptverfasser: Demircan, Sabri, Yazici, Mustafa, Durna, Kenan, Kilicaslan, Fethi, Demir, Serdar, Pinar, Mesut, Gulel, Okan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background In this study, we sought to investigate the relation of gamma‐glutamyltransferase (GGT) levels with the significance of coronary artery disease (CAD), clinical presentation, left ventricular (LV) function, and inflammatory activity. Methods A total of 235 patients (mean age: 60.1 ± 10.5 years, 166 [70%] males) who had coronary angiography were included in the study. Patients who had CAD constituted the study group (Group 1, n=189) and patients who had insignificant coronary disease or normal coronary activity constituted the control group (Group 2, n=46). Results GGT levels were higher in Group 1 than Group 2 (38.7 ± 30.9 U/L versus 27.5 ± 17.5 U/L, p =0.025). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was lower in Group 1 than Group 2 (52.6% ± 11.7% versus 58.8% ± 11.3%, p < 0.002). GGT activity (40.2 ± 32.5 U/L versus 29.1 ± 18.3 U/L, p < 0.002) and c‐reactive protein (CRP) levels (33.9 ± 43.6 mg/dl versus 17.8 ± 29.8 mg/dl, p < 0.002) were higher, LVEF (52.6% ± 12.1% versus 56.5% ± 11.0%, p =0.021) was lower in patients with acute coronary syndrome compared with stable CAD group. In regression analysis, CRP levels (p < 0.0001, odds ratio [OR]=3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10 < OR < 0.32), LVEF (p =0.016, OR=− 2.44, 95% CI − 0.95 < OR < − 0.10) and LV end‐diastolic pressure (p =0.015, OR=4.31, 95% CI − 1.19 < OR < − 0.13) were independent predictors of GGT activity. Conclusions The increased GGT activity is related to LV function, clinical stability, and inflammatory activity rather than the severity of CAD. Measurement of GGT activity may be useful in predicting cardiovascular risk. Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
ISSN:0160-9289
1932-8737
DOI:10.1002/clc.20345