Table 1.
Patient demographics and general clinical profile.
Fig 1.
Quantitative analysis by ELISA for plasma concentrations of (A) MMP9, (B) TGFβ, (C) IL-10, (D) TNF-α and (E) IL-6. Values represent means ± SEM. *p<0.05 vs. Control, **p<0.01 vs. Control, ++p<0.01 vs. MI+NEF. Patient groups: Control (n = 14), MI+NEF (n = 13), and MI+LEF (n = 16).
Fig 2.
qRT-PCR Analysis of circulating level of miRNAs (A) miR-24, (B) miR-29a, (C) miR-34a, (D) miR-126 and (E) miR-208b. Values represent means ± SEM. *p<0.05 vs. Control, **p<0.01 vs. Control, ++p<0.01 vs. MI+NEF. Patient groups: Control (n = 14), MI+NEF (n = 13) and MI+LEF (n = 16).
Fig 3.
Representative transthoracic echocardiographic images from post-MI patients performed within 48 hours of incidence of MI, to evaluate EF.
Images were assessed using biplane method in end diastole and end systole respectively. (A) Evaluation of cardiac function in patients with (A) MI with normal EF and (B) MI with low EF.
Fig 4.
Association of IL-10 and EF in post-MI patients.
(A) Statistical analysis performed using SPSS software to examine correlation between EF and IL-10 estimating Spearman’s correlation coefficient. (B) Comparison of EF after 2month follow-up in patients with MI with low IF. Values represent means ± SEM. **p<0.01 vs. MI+NEF, ##p<0.01 vs. MI+LEF.
Fig 5.
Schematic representation illustrating the association of EF with serum biomarkers and expression level of circulating miRNAs in the progression to HF post-MI.