Diagnostic value of uric acid to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio in abdominal aortic aneurysms

Figures & data

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the study population.

	CON	AAA	AAD
Sex[male(%)]	57(57%)	83(83%)*	87(87%)*
Age(years)	54.22 ± 1.0	59.22 ± 0.9*	54.16 ± 0.8^#
Smoking[n(%)]	31(31%)	49(49%)*	27(27%)^#
BMI(kg/m^2)	24.28 ± 0.3	24.61 ± 0.9	24.67 ± 0.6
Diabetes[n(%)]	12(12%)	15(15%)	21(21%)
CHD[n(%)]	10(10%)	14(14%)	14(14%)
Hypertension[n(%)]	53(53%)	58(58%)	77(77%)* ^#
SBP(mmHg)	133.62 ± 1.9	135.76 ± 1.9	150.18 ± 2.7* ^#
DBP(mmHg)	82.95 ± 1.2	79.66 ± 1.5	86.44 ± 1.7^#
Lipid-lowing therapy[n(%)]	19(19%)	6(6%)*	33(33%)^#
TG(mg/dL)	148.6 ± 7.9	206.5 ± 31.4*	122.2 ± 6.8^#
TC(mg/dL)	172.1 ± 3.8	175.6 ± 4.9	162.7 ± 4.5
HDL-C(mg/dL)	44.8 ± 1.1	39.4 ± 1.01*	45.7 ± 1.1^#
LDL-C(mg/dL)	108.8 ± 3.4	107.1 ± 4.1	95.3 ± 3.6* ^#
uric acid(mg/dL)	327.1 ± 10.0	387.5 ± 12.2*	345.3 ± 11.5^#

BMI: body mass index; CHD:coronary heart disease; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastole blood pressure; TG:triglyceride; TC: total cholesterol; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol;.

* p < 0.05 versus CON group,.

^# p < 0.05 versus AAA group.

Figure 1. Distribution of UHR in different groups. Data were presented as median (min -max). CON: control group; AAA: abdominal aortic aneurysms; AAD: acute aortic dissection; UHR: uric acid to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio. * p < 0.05 versus CON; # p < 0.05 versus AAD.

Figure 2. Diagnosis value of UHR to distinguish abdominal aortic aneurysm patients. (A-B) ROC analysis of HDL-C, UA and UHR to distinguish abdominal aortic aneurysm patients from healthy controls(A) and acute aortic dissection patients(B); (C) The percentage of subjects with low (L-UHR) and high (H-UHR) level of UHR according to the cut-off point determined by ROC analysis in three groups; (D) The proportion distribution of the three groups in patients with low and high UHR. CON: control group; AAA: abdominal aortic aneurysms; AAD: acute aortic dissection; AUC: area under the curve.

Table 2. Regression analysis.

	Univariate logistic regression analysis			Multivariate logistic regression analysis
Variables	OR	95%CI	P value	OR	95%CI	P value
Sex(male)	3.683	1.913–7.09	<0.001
Age(years)	1.063	1.028–1.099	<0.001	1.078	1.035–1.123	<0.001
Lipid-lowing therapy	0.219	0.07–0.68	0.009	0.222	0.065–0.755	0.016
Smoking	2.139	1.201–3.809	0.01	2.633	1.289–5.377	0.008
HDL-C(mg/dL)	0.945	0.921–0.970	<0.001
Uric acid(mg/dL)	1.262	1.109–1.436	<0.001
UHR(mg/dL)	1.107	1.063–1.153	<0.001	1.122	1.064–1.184	<0.001

Li Y, Wang DD, Ley SH, et al. Potential impact of time trend of Life-Style factors on cardiovascular disease burden in China. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(8):818–833. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.011.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Availability of data and materials

The datasets analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.