(579.2) Sex Differences in Vascular Endothelial Function After Liver Transplant

Poster Board Number: E298

Domenico Chavez (Virginia Commonwealth University), Natalie Bohmke (Virginia Commonwealth University), Linsey Martin (Virginia Commonwealth University), Austin Miller (Virginia Commonwealth University), Chandra Bhati (Virginia Commonwealth University), Susan Wolver (Virginia Commonwealth University), Mohammad Siddiqui (Virginia Commonwealth University), Danielle Kirkman (Virginia Commonwealth University)

INTRODUCTION Liver transplant (LT) recipients have an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) after transplant. Sex differences may be a significant determinant in the pathophysiology of CVD. However, sex-differences in vascular dysfunction, an established precursor to CVD, have not been explored in LT recipients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the sex differences in vascular function and cardiometabolic risk-factors to CVD among LT patients.

METHODS Conduit artery endothelial function was measured via flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery (FMDBA) with duplex ultrasound in 23 age-matched LT patients (11 Male, 12 Female; Mean ± SEM: Age 55 ± 2 years). Aortic pressure waves were synthesized from radial artery waveforms acquired by applanation tonometry and the use of a generalized transfer function. Novel plasma based cardiometabolic risk factors were assessed with nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Lipoprotein insulin resistance index (LPIR) was calculated as a weighted combination of concentrations and particle sizes of very low-density, low-density, and high-density lipoproteins. Diabetes risk index (DRI) factors LPIR and branched-chain amino acid levels to predict the risk of type 2 diabetes. Metabolic inflammation index (INFX) combines concentrations of the inflammation biomarker GlycA and high-density lipoprotein particle subspecies.

RESULTS Males had lower FMDBA than females (3.98 ± 0.63 vs 6.27 ± 0.43%, p lt; 0.01). There were no sex differences in aortic systolic pressure (Male vs Female; 129 ± 3 vs 118 ± 5 mmHg, p = 0.09), body mass index (38 ± 2 vs 36 ± 2 kg/m2, p = 0.61), LPIR (57 ± 7 vs 55 ± 7, p = 0.89), DRI (53 ± 7 vs 44 ± 6, p = 0.38), or INFX (47 ± 2 vs 54 ± 3, p = 0.13).  

CONCLUSIONS Males had poorer vascular endothelial function compared to females following LT, suggesting that males may be more susceptible to the development of CVD after LT. However, this increased risk cannot be explained by differences in traditional cardiometabolic risk factors. Future research should identify non-traditional CVD risk factors that contribute to sex differences in vascular function towards implementing precision medicine for the prevention and management of CVD in LT patients.

Support or Funding Information

Supported by funding from NIH UL1TR002649

lt;pgt;Supported by funding from NIH UL1TR002649lt;/pgt;