September 2004, Volume 10 No. 2

ARTICLE 8

Serum Vitamin E, C and A Status in Pre-Eclampsia and Eclampsia Patients, and Their Correlation with Blood
Pressure: a Study in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Sheikh Nazrul Islam1, Touhida Ahsan2, Shahla Khatun2, Md Nazrul Islam Khan1 & Monira Ahsan3
1 Institute of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Dhaka, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh
2 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Bangabanddhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh
3 Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Dhaka, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh.

ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to determine serum concentrations of vitamin E, C and A in pre-eclampsia and eclampsia patients, and to analyse their relationship with blood pressure. It was a cross-sectional case controlled study comprising forty-four pre-eclampsia, fifty eclampsia, and thirty-five normo-tensive pregnant women of singleton gestations in their third trimester from two hospitals in Dhaka, Bangladesh. HPLC and spectrophotometric methods were employed to determine the serum concentrations of vitamin E, A, and C. SPSS software package was used to analyse the data. Serum vitamin C was found to be significantly higher (F=6.266, p=0.003) in the pre-eclampsia group than in the pregnant control and eclampsia groups, while serum vitamin E and A in patients and control did not differ significantly. Vitamin C levels in the pre-eclampsia group were found to be influenced by their maternal age (F(2,41)=3.197, p=0.05), and found to be positively related to the maternal age (r =0.250 and p=0.106). In the pre-eclampsia group, vitamin E showed a positive significant relationship with systolic pressure (beta coefficient= 0.303, P=0.052, R2=0.101) and diastolic pressure (beta co-efficient=0.459, P=0.002, R2=0.211). In the eclampsia group, vitamin C showed a negative significant relationship with systolic blood pressure (beta co-efficient=-0.502, P=0.000, R2=0.302) but in the case of diastolic pressure, the relationship was reversed (beta co-efficient=0.443, P=0.001, R2=0.237).

Full Article >>

March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)

2010, Vol 16(2)

2010, Vol 16(3)

2011, Vol 17(1)

2011, Vol 17(2)

2011, Vol 17(3)

2012, Vol 18(1)

2012, Vol 18(2)

2012, Vol 18(3)

2013, Vol 19(1)

2013, Vol 19(2)

2013, Vol 19(3)

2014, Vol 20(1)

2014, Vol 20(2)

2014, Vol 20(3)

2015, Vol 21(1)

2015, Vol 21(2)

2015, Vol 21(3)

2016, Vol 22(1)

2016, Vol 22(2)

2016, Vol 22 Supplement

2016, Vol 22(3)

2017, Vol 23(1)

2017, Vol 23(2)