International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
Identification of Myocardial Insulin Resistance by Using Liver Tests: A Simple Approach for Clinical Practice.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Herance José Raúl, Martín-Saladich Queralt, Velásquez Mayra Alejandra, Hernandez Cristina, Aparicio Carolina, Ramirez-Serra Clara, Ferrer Roser, Giralt-Arnaiz Marina, González-Ballester Miguel Ángel, Pericàs Juan M, Castell-Conesa Joan, Aguadé-Bruix Santiago, Simó Rafael
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We report that myocardial insulin resistance (mIR) occurs in around 60% of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and was associated with higher cardiovascular risk in comparison with patients with insulin-sensitive myocardium (mIS). These two phenotypes (mIR vs. mIS) can only be assessed using time-consuming and expensive methods. The aim of the present study is to search a simple and reliable surrogate to identify both phenotypes.
METHODS: Forty-seven patients with T2D underwent myocardial [18F]FDG PET/CT at baseline and after a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (HEC) to determine mIR were prospectively recruited. Biochemical assessments were performed before and after the HEC. Baseline hepatic steatosis index and index of hepatic fibrosis (FIB-4) were calculated. Furthermore, liver stiffness measurement was performed using transient elastography.
RESULTS: The best model to predict the presence of mIR was the combination of transaminases, protein levels, FIB-4 score and HOMA (AUC = 0.95; sensibility: 0.81; specificity: 0.95). We observed significantly higher levels of fibrosis in patients with mIR than in those with mIS (p = 0.034). In addition, we found that patients with mIR presented a reduced glucose uptake by the liver in comparison with patients with mIS.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of HOMA, protein, transaminases and FIB-4 is a simple and reliable tool for identifying mIR in patients with T2D. This information will be useful to improve the stratification of cardiovascular risk in T2D.
METHODS: Forty-seven patients with T2D underwent myocardial [18F]FDG PET/CT at baseline and after a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (HEC) to determine mIR were prospectively recruited. Biochemical assessments were performed before and after the HEC. Baseline hepatic steatosis index and index of hepatic fibrosis (FIB-4) were calculated. Furthermore, liver stiffness measurement was performed using transient elastography.
RESULTS: The best model to predict the presence of mIR was the combination of transaminases, protein levels, FIB-4 score and HOMA (AUC = 0.95; sensibility: 0.81; specificity: 0.95). We observed significantly higher levels of fibrosis in patients with mIR than in those with mIS (p = 0.034). In addition, we found that patients with mIR presented a reduced glucose uptake by the liver in comparison with patients with mIS.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of HOMA, protein, transaminases and FIB-4 is a simple and reliable tool for identifying mIR in patients with T2D. This information will be useful to improve the stratification of cardiovascular risk in T2D.