| Literature DB >> 29596445 |
Kieran Borgeat1,2, Stijn J M Niessen1, Lois Wilkie1, Norelene Harrington3, David B Church1, Virginia Luis Fuentes1, David J Connolly1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In humans, acromegaly due to a pituitary somatotrophic adenoma is a recognized cause of increased left ventricular (LV) mass. Acromegalic cardiomyopathy is incompletely understood, and represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality. We describe the clinical, echocardiographic and histopathologic features of naturally occurring feline acromegalic cardiomyopathy, an emerging disease among domestic cats.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29596445 PMCID: PMC5875754 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194342
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Composite image to demonstrate a pituitary mass typical of cats with acromegaly.
Transverse (left) and saggital (middle) CT images showing a contrast enhancing pituitary mass (>4mm height) in a cat with acromegaly. Without treatment, the cat was euthanised some months later and post-mortem examination demonstrated the large pituitary mass (right). Histopathology was consistent with an acidophil adenoma.
Population characteristics of cats enrolled in the echocardiographic study.
Normally distributed data are represented mean (±standard deviation) and compared using a one-way ANOVA. Non-normally distributed data are represented median (range) and compared using a Kruskal-Wallis test. Categorical variables are represented as percentages and compared using a Chi squared test.
| Variable | Healthy | Diabetes mellitus | Hypersomatotropism | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 16 | 24 | 67 | - |
| Age (years) | 12.4 (10.2–19.4) | 11.5 (5–17) | 10.1 (5–15) | <0.001 |
| Male (%) | 69% | 79% | 66% | 0.301 |
| Pedigree (%) | 0% | 4% | 12% | 0.381 |
| Body weight (kg) | 4.55 (2.68–6.46) | 4.48 (2.84–7.40) b | 5.70 (2.0–10.5) | 0.003 |
| Body condition score ≥6/9 | 28% | 37% | 24% | 0.406 |
| Rectal temperature (°C) | 38.1 (±0.3) | 38.1 (±0.7) | 38.0 (±0.6) | 0.651 |
| Respiratory rate (breaths per minute) | 36 (20–72) | 32 (20–52) | 32 (20–80) | 0.366 |
| Heart rate (beats/minute) | 179 (±18) | 178 (±24) | 172 (±24) | 0.290 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 133 (120–169) | 156 (105–171) | 148 (120–171) | 0.870 |
| Murmur present (%) | 31% | 21% | 40% | 0.956 |
| Gallop sound present (%) | 0% | 8% | 6% | 0.399 |
| Arrhythmia present (%) | 0% | 4% | 3% | 0.644 |
| IGF-1 (ng/ml) | 396 (226–728) | 504 (171–749) | 1800 (1001->2000) | <0.001 |
| Insulin dose (IU per 24h) | . | 6 (3–8) | 16 (2–80) | <0.001 |
| Fructosamine (μmol/L) | . | 453 (278–746) | 525 (169–1,076) | 0.047 |
| NTproBNP (pmol/L) | 86 (24–1358) | 50 (24–186) | 74 (24–1219) | 0.213 |
| Cardiac troponin I (ng/ml) | 0.02 (0–0.22) | 0.04 (0.02–0.1) | 0.03 (0.01–0.23) | 0.138 |
IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor 1;
a/b indicates a statistically significant difference when pairwise comparison between these factors was performed
Φ Laflamme D. Development and validation of a body condition score system for cats: a clinical tool. 1997 Feline Practice 25 13 e18
Fig 2Box and whisker plot to illustrate the difference in maximum left ventricular (LV) wall thickness between the three groups of cats at enrolment.
DM, diabetes mellitus; HS, hypersomatotropism.
Fig 3Box and whisker plots to illustrate the difference in left atrial size between groups at enrolment.
DM, diabetes mellitus; HS, hypersomatotropism.
Echocardiographic measurements of all cats enrolled in the study.
Normally distributed data are represented mean (±standard deviation) and compared using a one-way ANOVA. Non-normally distributed data are represented median (range) and compared using a Kruskal-Wallis test. Categorical variables are represented as percentages and compared using a Chi squared test.
| Variable | Healthy | Diabetes mellitus | Hypersomatotropism | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IVSd (mm) | 4.9 (3.9–6.5) | 5.7 (4.2–9.1) | 6.5 (4.1–10.1) | <0.001 |
| LVFWd (mm) | 4.6 (3.6–6.2) | 5.3 (3.8–7.3) | 5.9 (4.1–10.0) | <0.001 |
| Maximum LV thickness (mm) | 5.2 (4.1–6.5) | 5.9 (4.2–9.1) | 6.5 (4.4–10.1) | <0.001 |
| LVIDd (mm) | 14.2 (11.2–17.6) | 15.4 (11.2–20.3) | 16.1 (11.9–20.8) | 0.013 |
| LV FS (%) | 51 (±7.6) | 45 (±7.8) | 46 (±3.4) | 0.351 |
| LA diameter (mm) | 14.0 (12.6–17.4) | 15.2 (10.1–21.3) | 16.6 (13.0–29.5) | <0.001 |
| LA:Ao ratio | 1.3 (1.0–2.2) | 1.3 (1.0–2.0) | 1.6 (1.0–2.9) | <0.001 |
| LA FS (%) | 31 (20–50) | 30 (14–47) | 29 (1–63) | 0.570 |
| LA appendage flow velocity (msec-1) | 0.47 (±0.15) | 0.41 (±0.12) | 0.42 (±0.42) | 0.736 |
| LVOT velocity (msec-1) | 1.0 (±0.3) | 0.94 (±0.2) | 1.2 (±0.3) | 0.008 |
| RVOT velocity (msec-1) | 0.9 (±0.3) | 1.0 (±0.4) | 0.9 (±0.2) | 0.911 |
| Mitral E velocity (msec-1) | 0.7 (±0.12) | 0.7 (±0.19) | 0.8 (±0.17) | 0.275 |
| E deceleration time (ms) | 77 (±18) | 74 (±13) | 74 (±23) | 0.758 |
| Mitral A velocity (msec-1) | 0.6 (±0.17) | 0.6 (±0.12) | 0.6 (±0.18) | 0.450 |
| Mitral E:A ratio | 1.2 (0.7–1.9) | 1.2 (0.8–2.0) | 1.2 (0.8–4.8) | 0.296 |
| Diastolic class ≥3 | 6% | 13% | 27% a | 0.020 |
| TDI S’s velocity (msec-1) | 0.10 (±0.03) | 0.09 (±0.02) | 0.09 (±0.03) | 0.297 |
| TDI E’s velocity (msec-1) | 0.09 (±0.02) | 0.06 (±0.02) | 0.07 (±0.02) | 0.004 |
| TDI A’s velocity (msec-1) | 0.07 (±0.03) | 0.09 (±0.03) | 0.08 (±0.03) | 0.476 |
| Mitral E: TDI E’ ratio | 9.0 (±1.7) | 10.6 (±2.5) | 12.3 (±4.3) | 0.027 |
| Aortic insufficiency (%) | 0% | 17% | 31% b | 0.006 |
| Systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve | 12% | 4% | 9% | 0.592 |
a/b indicates a statistically significant difference when pairwise comparison between these factors was performed
Echocardiographic and plasma IGF-1 measurements before and after treatment of acromegaly.
| Echocardiographic parameter | Pre-treatment | Post-treatment | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| IVSd (mm) | 5.9 (4.4–8.1) | 4.9 (3.6–6.6) | <0.001 |
| LVFWd (mm) | 5.5 (4.2–8.9) | 4.9 (3.7–8.4) | 0.001 |
| LVmax (mm) | 6.1 (4.4–8.9) | 5.2 (3.9–8.4) | 0.002 |
| LA diameter (mm) | 16.3 (13.0–21.0) | 14 (11.5–16.6) | 0.001 |
| LVIDd (mm) | 16.8 (11.9–19.2) | 15.1 (10.2–19.4) | 0.01 |
| LV FS (%) | 43 (20–69) | 51 (36–74) | 0.117 |
| LA FS (%) | 28 (15–57) | 31 (18–58) | 0.627 |
| IGF-1 (ng/mL) | 1961 (1055–2000) | 85 (15–721) | 0.008 |
| IVSd (mm) | 6.7 (5.5–8.0) | 6.1 (4.8–8.0) | 0.575 |
| LVFWd (mm) | 6.2 (5.8–8.2) | 5.8 (4.4–7.5) | 0.208 |
| LVmax (mm) | 6.7 (5.9–8.2) | 6.1 (5–8) | 0.575 |
| LA diameter (mm) | 17.4 (14.1–22.4) | 15.6 (11.8–19.3) | 0.028 |
| LVIDd (mm) | 15.5 (12.6–17.7) | 15.9 (11.3–17.9) | 1.000 |
| LV FS (%) | 45 (41–60) | 47 (29–51) | 0.161 |
| LA FS (%) | 34 (27–60) | 31 (22–42) | 0.465 |
| IGF-1 (ng/mL) | 2000 (993–2000) | 1659 (18–2000) | 0.080 |
*indicates statistical significance at the 5% level
Population characteristics of cats whose myocardial tissue was analysed in the histopathologic study.
HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; HW, heart weight; BW, body weight; RVFW, right ventricular free wall thickness; IVS, interventricular septal thickness; LVFW, left ventricular wall thickness.
| Control | HCM | Hypersomatotropism | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 21 | 21 | 21 | - |
| Male (%) | 38 | 71 | 57 | 0.080 |
| Pedigree (%) | 43 | 14 | 10 | 0.030 |
| Age (years) | 4.0 (2.0–10.0) | 8.0 (3.0–15.0) | 10.8 (3.1–14.6) | <0.001 |
| Body weight (kg) | 4.2 (2.0–8.0) | 4.9 (3.9–7.0) | 5.4 (3.1–8.3) | 0.024 |
| Absolute heart weight (g) | 15.5 (10.8–32.6) | 27.4 (18.0–58.0) | 25.0 (19.7–37.6) | <0.001 |
| HW: BW (%) | 0.39 (0.29–0.68) | 0.63 (0.26–1.4) | 0.47 (0.38–0.60) | 0.160 |
| RVFW (mm) | 1.9 (0.9–2.9) | 2.5 (1.0–4.0) | 2.0 (1.0–5.0) | 0.096 |
| IVS (mm) | 7.0 (3.0–9.0) | 9.5 (4.0–12.0) | 8.0 (4.0–12.0) | 0.032 |
| LVFW (mm) | 8.0 (3.0–12.0) | 10.0 (3.0–18.0) | 8.0 (4.0–12.0) | 0.024 |
a/b indicates a statistically significant difference when pairwise comparison between these factors was performed
Fig 4Box plot to show the proportion of cats in each group affected by different grades of (top) myocyte hypertrophy and (bottom) myocyte disarray.
No cats reviewed were classified as non-hypertrophic.
Fig 5Box plot to show the proportion of cats affected by myocardial inflammatory cell infiltrate in each group.