| Literature DB >> 29115953 |
Yi Zhang1,2, Cuiling Zhu1,2, Xin Wen1,2, Xingchun Wang1,2, Liang Li1,2, Sharvan Rampersad1,2, Liesheng Lu3, Donglei Zhou3, Chunhua Qian1,2, Ran Cui1,2, Manna Zhang1,2, Peng Yang1,2, Shen Qu1,2, Le Bu4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acanthosis nigricans (AN) has a close relationship with obesity. It is believed that obesity and AN have the common pathophysiological basis such as hyperinsulinism. This study is aimed to observe the effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) on body composition and insulin resistance in Chinese obese patients with acanthosis nigricans.Entities:
Keywords: Acanthosis nigricans; Bariatric surgery; Body composition; Insulin resistance; Obesity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29115953 PMCID: PMC5678791 DOI: 10.1186/s12944-017-0598-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lipids Health Dis ISSN: 1476-511X Impact factor: 3.876
Clinical and metabolic characteristics of subjects at baseline and 3 months post LSG
| Characteristics | OB( | AN( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 m | 3 m | 0 m | 3 m | |
| Age(years) | 42. 71 ± 14.13 | – | 29.04 ± 5.85** | – |
| Gender(Male/Female) | 6/8 | – | 12/11 | – |
| AN Score | – | – | 3.52 ± 0.79 | 1.48 ± 0.73 |
| BMI(kg/m2) | 37.79 ± 4.87 | 30.57 ± 4.53 | 40.56 ± 4.54 | 31.92 ± 4.21 |
| NC(cm) | 43.64 ± 3.78 | 38.50 ± 3.21 | 44.89 ± 4.71 | 40.59 ± 3.47 |
| WC(cm) | 119.50 ± 13.93 | 102.14 ± 12.98 | 120.76 ± 11.07 | 102.78 ± 11.13 |
| HC(cm) | 122.07 ± 12.33 | 107.75 ± 10.23 | 122.43 ± 8.28 | 109.11 ± 9.13 |
| WHR | 0.98 ± 0.07 | 0.95 ± 0.07 | 0.99 ± 0.07 | 0.94 ± 0.07 |
| FPG(mmol/L) | 7.52 ± 3.23 | 5.45 ± 1.61 | 5.81 ± 1.62 | 4.53 ± 0.44 |
| FINS(mmol/L) | 23.24 ± 8.52 | 10.68 ± 5.17 | 44.81 ± 33.63** | 12.53 ± 7.90 |
| FCP(mmol/L) | 3.49 ± 1.15 | 2.47 ± 0.65 | 5.18 ± 2.10** | 2.75 ± 0.83 |
| HOMA-IR | 8.04 ± 3.73 | 2.59 ± 1.64 | 12.29 ± 10.94 | 2.57 ± 1.77 |
| LNIR | 1.98 ± 0.50 | 0.79 ± 0.58 | 2.22 ± 0.73 | 0.76 ± 0.63 |
| HbA1c(%) | 6.99 ± 1.84 | 5.79 ± 1.06 | 6.40 ± 1.18 | 5.21 ± 0.28 |
| TC(mmol/L) | 4.60 ± 1.17 | 4.23 ± 0.96 | 4.58 ± 1.12 | 4.41 ± 0.79 |
| TG(mmol/L) | 1.74 ± 0.66 | 1.17 ± 0.40 | 1.92 ± 1.62 | 1.14 ± 0.30 |
| HDL(mmol/L) | 1.04 ± 0.19 | 1.10 ± 0.28 | 0.94 ± 0.23 | 0.99 ± 0.22 |
| LDL(mmol/L) | 2.91 ± 0.97 | 2.57 ± 0.75 | 2.81 ± 0.86 | 2.84 ± 0.57 |
Data presented as means ± SD; P <0.05 baseline vs. 3 months; P <0.01 baseline vs. 3 months; **P <0.01 OB vs. AN group at baseline
Body composition and derived indexes in OB and AN patients at baseline, 3 months post LSG
| Variables | OB | AN | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 m | 3 m | 0 m | 3 m | ||
| Total | FM (kg) | 45.78 ± 10.63 | 36.21 ± 9.05** | 47.78 ± 9.02 | 36.71 ± 8.59** |
| LM (kg) | 55.29 ± 11.02 | 46.54 ± 9.67** | 62.92 ± 12.12 | 51.69 ± 9.20** | |
| BMC (kg) | 2.51 ± 0.51 | 2.51 ± 0.48 | 2.66 ± 0.50 | 2.68 ± 0.50 | |
| Android | FM (kg) | 4.77 ± 1.41 | 3.43 ± 1.11** | 4.82 ± 0.91 | 3.15 ± 0.96** |
| LM (kg) | 4.71 ± 0.87 | 3.53 ± 0.59** | 5.03 ± 1.10 | 3.65 ± 0.81** | |
| Gynoid | FM (kg) | 6.29 ± 1.56 | 5.00 ± 1.21** | 6.65 ± 1.52 | 4.92 ± 1.36** |
| LM (kg) | 8.66 ± 1.85 | 6.95 ± 1.36** | 10.13 ± 2.03 | 8.06 ± 1.70** | |
| Trunk | FM (kg) | 25.24 ± 6.56 | 19.20 ± 6.03** | 26.47 ± 4.67 | 18.75 ± 4.75** |
| LM (kg) | 28.38 ± 4.40 | 23.16 ± 4.06** | 31.16 ± 6.49 | 24.84 ± 4.72** | |
| BMC (kg) | 0.75 ± 0.13 | 0.67 ± 0.10* | 0.75 ± 0.16 | 0.72 ± 0.15* | |
| Arms | FM (kg) | 6.47 ± 1.85 | 5.08 ± 0.97** | 6.84 ± 1.35 | 5.50 ± 2.10** |
| LM (kg) | 5.52 ± 1.75 | 4.73 ± 1.53** | 6.37 ± 1.81 | 5.36 ± 1.32** | |
| BMC (kg) | 0.33 ± 0.07 | 0.35 ± 0.11 | 0.34 ± 0.06 | 0.35 ± 0.07 | |
| Legs | FM (kg) | 12.41 ± 3.07 | 10.44 ± 2.61** | 14.29 ± 3.69 | 10.88 ± 3.36** |
| LM (kg) | 17.86 ± 4.33 | 15.13 ± 3.83** | 20.96 ± 3.82 | 17.15 ± 3.51** | |
| BMC (kg) | 0.88 ± 0.21 | 0.92 ± 0.22* | 0.99 ± 0.21 | 1.00 ± 0.21 | |
| Head | FM (kg) | 1.66 ± 0.25 | 1.49 ± 0.25** | 1.67 ± 0.27 | 1.59 ± 0.33 |
| LM (kg) | 4.36 ± 0.57 | 4.08 ± 0.56* | 4.44 ± 0.57 | 4.34 ± 0.66 | |
| BMC (kg) | 0.60 ± 0.14 | 0.61 ± 0.13 | 0.59 ± 0.12 | 0.61 ± 0.12 | |
| Vat mass(kg) | 1.33 ± 0.28 | 1.03 ± 0.33** | 1.08 ± 0.24 | 0.72 ± 0.23** | |
| Vat volume(cm3) | 1440.45 ± 299.95 | 1118.45 ± 353.02** | 1171.22 ± 254.85 | 774.06 ± 246.34** | |
| Vat area(cm2) | 276.36 ± 57.58 | 214.64 ± 67.61** | 224.72 ± 48.92 | 148.52 ± 47.21** | |
| Indexes | A/G | 1.20 ± 0.14 | 1.16 ± 0.14 | 1.26 ± 0.15 | 1.23 ± 0.15 |
| trunk/leg | 1.18 ± 0.13 | 1.14 ± 0.13 | 1.17 ± 0.15 | 1.09 ± 0.28 | |
| Trunk/limb | 1.36 ± 0.26 | 1.26 ± 0.23* | 1.26 ± 0.28 | 1.13 ± 0.33 |
Data presented as means ± SD
*P < 0.05 vs. baseline; **P < 0.01 vs. baseline
Fig. 1A Comparison of different part in fat mass and lean mass after LSG in AN and OB groups. a change of fat mass. b change of lean mass. Data are presented as mean. Error bars are SD. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01
Fig. 2Comparison between the change of fat mass and lean mass in the same body parts after LSG in AN and OB groups. Data are presented as mean. Error bars are SD. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01
Fig. 3Correlations between android fat mass (FM) and LNIR at baseline in AN group. Android FM was positively associated with LNIR (a) and with FINS (b)
Fig. 4Correlations between changes in LNIR and changes in android fat mass(FM), VAT mass in AN group. LNIR changes were significantly associated with Android FM loss (a) and with VAT mass reduction (b)