| Literature DB >> 29391863 |
K Sattler1, M Behnes1, C Barth1, A Wenke1, B Sartorius1, I El-Battrawy1, K Mashayekhi2, J Kuschyk1, U Hoffmann1, T Papavasiliu1, C Fastner1, S Baumann1, S Lang1, X Zhou1, G Yücel1, M Borggrefe1,3, I Akin1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) by implantation of an occlusion device is an established cardiac intervention to reduce risk of stroke while avoiding intake of oral anticoagulation medication during atrial fibrillation. Cardiac interventions can alter local or systemic gene and protein expression. Effects of LAAC on systemic metabolism have not been studied yet.Entities:
Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; LAA occlusion device ; Left atrial appendage; Left atrial appendage closure; Metabolomics; SDMA; Sarcosine
Year: 2017 PMID: 29391863 PMCID: PMC5772135 DOI: 10.1007/s11306-017-1255-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolomics ISSN: 1573-3882 Impact factor: 4.290
Baseline characteristics of 44 patients with successful interventional left atrial appendage closure
| Demographic factors | |
| Male | 30 (68.2) |
| Age, years (range) | 78 (43.0–87.0) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 28.1 (24.7–32.7) |
| NTpro-BNP, ng/l | 975.3 (455.2–1429.0) |
| Cardiovascular risk factors, n (%) | |
| Hypertension | 42 (95.4) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 16 (36.7) |
| Hypercholesterinemia | 22 (50.0) |
| Medical history, n (%) | |
| Atrial fibrillation | |
| Paroxysmal | 24 (54.5) |
| Persistent | 6 (13.5) |
| Permanent | 14 (31.8) |
| LV-EF | |
| Normal (>55%) | 34 (77.2) |
| Mild | 4 (9.1) |
| Moderate | 4 (9.1) |
| Severe | 2 (4.5) |
| Prior PVI | 4 (9.1) |
| TIA | 3 (6.8) |
| Stroke | 7 (15.9) |
| Coronary artery disease | 25 (56.8) |
| Prior myocardial infarction | 10 (22.7) |
| Heart failure | 10 (22.7) |
| Peripheral vascular disease | 4 (9.1) |
| Chronic kidney disease | 18 (40.1) |
| Creatinine, mg/dl (IQR) | 1.05 (0.9–1.3) |
| MDRD-GFR, ml/min (IQR) | 65.5 (52.7–79.7) |
| Chronic liver disease | 3 (6.8) |
| Prior bleeding | 34 (77.3) |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score (IQR) | 4 (3.0–5.0) |
| HAS-BLED score (IQR) | 4 (3.0–4.3) |
| Medication | |
| Beta-blockers | 28 (63.6) |
| Diuretics | 32 (72.7) |
| ACE-inhibitors/ARBs | 20 (45.5) |
| Aldosteron receptor antagonist | 2 (4.5) |
| Events during follow-up, n (%) | |
| Acute myocardial infarction | 1 (2.3) |
| Stroke | 0 (0) |
| Pulmonary embolism | 1 (2.3) |
| Bleeding according to BARC score | 8 (18.2) |
| Type 1 | 1 (2.3) |
| Type 2 | 5 (11.4) |
| Type 3a | 2 (4.5) |
| ≥Type 3b | 0 |
| Rehospitalization | 24 (54.5) |
Values are given as median (25th and 75th percentiles) or total numbers (percentage)
ACE angiotensin converting enzyme, AF atrial fibrillation, AMI acute myocardial infarction, ARB angiotensin receptor blocker, BARC bleeding academic research consortium, BMI body mass index, IQR interquartile range, LV-EF left ventricular ejection fraction, NTpro-BNP N terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide, PVI pulmonary vein isolation, TIA transient ischemic attack, MDRD-GFR modification of diet in renal disease-glomerular filtration rate
Fig. 1a Hierarchical cluster analysis of metabolite concentrations at T0 versus T1 of the 44 study patients. Plasma samples were measured by mass spectrometry (ESI-LC-MS/MS and MS/MS) with an AbsoluteIDQ™ p180. Numbers indicate the individual sample numbering at intervention (single number) and follow up (extension “0.2”). ADMA asymmetric dimethylarginine, Ala alanine, Arg arginine, Asn asparagine, Asp asparate, Cit citrulline, Gln glutamine, Glu glutamate, Gly glycine, Orn ornithin, Pro proline, SDMA symmetric dimethylarginine, Ser serine, t4-OH-Pro trans 4-hydroxy-proline. b Score plot of the PLS-DA analysis comparing the log transformed datasets of metabolite concentrations at T0 (red) versus T1 (blue). The areas represent the 95% confidence interval. R2X = 60.1%, R2Y = 23.1%
Concentrations and mean percent change of different metabolites before (T0) and 6 months after (T1) successful interventional LAAC
| Metabolite | T0 (µM) | T1 (µM) | Percent change | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) | 0.55 ± 0.14 | 0.55 ± 0.15 | 1.09 ± 2.37 | 0.87 |
| Alanine (Ala) | 307.05 ± 102.32 | 338.19 ± 107.43 | 10.14 ± 3.98 |
|
| Arginine (Arg) | 66.33 ± 17.12 | 64.82 ± 17.00 | −2.28 ± 1.74 | 0.66 |
| Asparagine (Asn) | 39.13 ± 10.18 | 40.11 ± 14.80 | 2.50 ± 2.00 | 0.85 |
| Aspartate (Asp) | 5.34 ± 1.70 | 4.92 ± 1.89 | −7.87 ± 3.78 |
|
| Citrulline (Cit) | 33.77 ± 11.39 | 37.25 ± 12.65 | 10.31 ± 2.17 | 0.09 |
| Glutamine (Gln) | 661.5 ± 109.10 | 646.89 ± 120.87 | −2.21 ± 2.02 | 0.31 |
| Gutamate (Glu) | 86.54 ± 51.92 | 87.14 ± 51.72 | 0.69 ± 1.24 | 0.85 |
| Glycine (Gly) | 263.89 ± 104.57 | 226.11 ± 85.56 | −14.32 ± 3.52 | < |
| Hexose | 6703.41 ± 1754.89 | 7920.14 ± 2478.32 | 18.15 ± 3.15 | < |
| Ornithin (Orn) | 80.63 ± 26.71 | 86.25 ± 27.88 | 6.97 ± 2.94 | 0.13 |
| Proline (Pro) | 203.82 ± 54.85 | 236.55 ± 79.86 | 16.06 ± 3.76 |
|
| Sarcosine | 2.29 ± 0.54 | 2.55 ± 0.59 | 11.35 ± 2.97 |
|
| Symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) | 0.85 ± 0.46 | 0.74 ± 0.37 | −12.94 ± 3.07 | < |
| Serine (Ser) | 106.98 ± 27.49 | 95.27 ± 24.86 | −10.95 ± 3.91 |
|
| Trans 4-hydroxy-Proline (t4-OH-Pro) | 11.97 ± 5.22 | 12.58 ± 5.54 | 5.10 ± 2.46 | 0.42 |
Metabolites appear in alphabetical order. Data are presented as mean concentration ± standard deviation
Statistical significance p < 0.05 is highlighted in bold
Fig. 2Effect of LAAC on the metabolome. Mean percent change of the concentrations of different metabolites during follow up. For abbreviations, see legend of Fig. 1a. *p < 0.05 versus concentration at baseline
Association of the independent parameter “T0 versus T1” with metabolite concentrations in the linear mixed model regression analysis
| Rank | Metabolite | Beta | SE | T value | CI (2.5%) | CI (97.5%) | FDR | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hexose | 0.21 | 0.05 | 4.50 | 0.12 | 0.31 | <0.01 | < |
| 2 | Symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) | −0.19 | 0.05 | −4.04 | −0.28 | −0.10 | <0.01 | < |
| 3 | Glycine (Gly) | −0.21 | 0.06 | −3.63 | −0.32 | −0.10 | <0.01 | < |
| 4 | Proline (Pro) | 0.18 | 0.05 | 3.39 | 0.08 | 0.29 | <0.01 | < |
| 5 | Sarcosine | 0.16 | 0.05 | 3.27 | 0.06 | 0.26 | <0.01 | < |
| 6 | Serine (Ser) | −0.17 | 0.06 | −2.84 | −0.29 | −0.05 | 0.02 | < |
| 7 | Alanine (Ala) | 0.14 | 0.07 | 2.05 | 0.004 | 0.27 | 0.10 | < |
| 8 | Aspartate (Asp) | −0.17 | 0.08 | −2.02 | −0.22 | −0.003 | 0.10 | < |
| 9 | Citrulline (Cit) | 0.13 | 0.07 | 1.74 | −0.02 | 0.28 | 0.16 | 0.09 |
| 10 | Ornithin (Orn) | 0.10 | 0.07 | 1.54 | −0.03 | 0.24 | 0.21 | 0.13 |
| 11 | Glutamine (Gln) | −0.04 | 0.04 | −1.02 | −0.11 | 0.04 | 0.46 | 0.31 |
| 12 | trans 4-hydroxy-Proline (t4-OH-Pro) | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.81 | −0.11 | 0.26 | 0.57 | 0.42 |
| 13 | Arginine (Arg) | −0.03 | 0.07 | −0.45 | −0.16 | 0.11 | 0.81 | 0.66 |
| 14 | Asparagine (Asn) | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.19 | −0.10 | 0.12 | 0.87 | 0.85 |
| 15 | Gutamate (Glu) | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.19 | −0.21 | 0.26 | 0.87 | 0.85 |
| 16 | Asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.16 | −0.05 | 0.06 | 0.87 | 0.87 |
CI confidence interval, FDR false discovery rate, SE standard error
Statistical significance p < 0.05 is highlighted in bold
Fig. 3Pathways and metabolite concentrations affected by LAAC as assessed by mixed linear regression analysis. Green labeling positive association of metabolites with time after follow up. Purple labeling negative association of metabolites with time after follow up. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05