| Literature DB >> 31470414 |
Frederique Van de Velde1, Marlies Bekaert1, Anja Geerts2, Anne Hoorens3, Arsène-Hélène Batens1, Samyah Shadid1, Margriet Ouwens1,4,5, Yves Van Nieuwenhove6, Bruno Lapauw1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Obese subjects with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are more prone to develop additional metabolic disturbances such as systemic insulin resistance (IR) and type 2 diabetes. NAFLD is defined by hepatic steatosis, lobular inflammation, ballooning and stage of fibrosis, but it is unclear if and which components could contribute to IR.Entities:
Keywords: NAFLD; hepatic inflammation; insulin resistance; obesity
Year: 2019 PMID: 31470414 PMCID: PMC6765320 DOI: 10.1530/EC-19-0366
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endocr Connect ISSN: 2049-3614 Impact factor: 3.335
General descriptives of the whole cohort and for SAF groups separately.
| All ( | No NAFLD ( | NAFL ( | NASH ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 46 ± 11 | 42 ± 15 | 45 ± 12 | 47 ± 9 | 0.581 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 42.2 ± 4.7 | 44.0 ± 4.9 | 43.3 ± 4.4 | 41.0 ± 4.7 | 0.073 |
| Sex (male/female) | 70/8 | 3/2 | 29/4 | 38/2 | 0.061 |
| T2D (yes/no) | 16/62 | 0/5 | 1/32 | 15/25 | |
| CRP (nmol/L) | 40.0 (21.0–61.9) | 59.1 (41.9–76.2) | 40.0 (25.7–61.9) | 37.6 (20.0–57.6) | 0.618 |
| Cholesterol (mmol/L)a | 4.99 ± 1.09 | 4.50 ± 0.12 | 4.82 ± 1.03 | 5.25 ± 1.20 | 0.431 |
| LDL (mmol/L)a | 2.86 ± 0.81 | 2.58 ± 0.29 | 2.87 ± 0.87 | 2.89 ± 0.80 | 0.754 |
| HDL (mmol/L)a | 1.02 ± 0.33 | 1.09 ± 0.23 | 1.01 ± 0.28 | 1.00 ± 0.41 | 0.674 |
| TG (mmol/L)b | 1.84 (1.39–2.42) | 1.22 (1.19–1.34) | 1.95 (1.53–2.20) | 1.97 (1.45–2.89) | |
| NEFA (mEq/L) | 0.61 (0.50–0.70) | 0.86 (0.79–0.93) | 0.564 (0.49–0.65) | 0.645 (0.52–0.74) | 0.099 |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | 5.38 (4.83–6.22) | 4.88 (4.66–6.22) | 5.11 (4.77–5.55) | 5.80 (5.13–6.80) | |
| Insulin (pmol/L) | 92.9 (57.1–173.6) | 57.1 (49.3–173.6) | 92.2 (60.5–152.8) | 99.4 (63.2–178.2) | 0.472 |
| HOMA-IR | 3.40 (1.94–6.50) | 1.78 (1.53–4.66) | 3.22 (1.91–4.97) | 3.76 (2.12–7.53) | 0.177 |
Data represented as mean ± s.d. or median (first quartile–third quartile). P values are shown for differences between the three SAF groups, significant P values were indicated in bold.
a24 patients were excluded from analysis due to use of statins. bOne patient is excluded as it had an extreme high value (TG = 16.14 mmol/L).
BMI, body mass index; CRP, C-reactive protein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment-estimated insulin resistance; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; NAFL, nonalcoholic fatty liver; NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; NEFA, non-esterified fatty acids; T2D, type 2 diabetes; TG, triglycerides.
Distribution of the population according to the histological NAFLD components.
| Histological components NAFLD | |
|---|---|
| Steatosis | |
| Steatosis <5% | 5 |
| Steatosis 5–33% | 31 |
| Steatosis >33–66% | 18 |
| Steatosis >66% | 24 |
| Ballooning | |
| No balloon cells | 33 |
| Few balloon cells | 29 |
| Many balloon cells | 16 |
| Lobular inflammation | |
| No inflammatory foci (per 20× field) | 29 |
| <2 inflammatory foci (per 20× field) | 42 |
| 2–4 inflammatory foci (per 20× field) | 6 |
| >4 inflammatory foci (per 20× field) | 1 |
| Fibrosisa | |
| No fibrosis | 17 |
| Perisinusoidal or (peri)portal fibrosis | 39 |
| Perisinusoidal and (peri)portal fibrosis | 17 |
| Bridging fibrosis | 3 |
| Cirrhosis | 1 |
aOne patient did not have a fibrosis score.
NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
Figure 1The correlation between NAS and HOMA-IR levels in a population with obesity. HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment-estimated insulin resistance.
Figure 2Differences in HOMA-IR levels between histological NAFLD groups. HOMA-IR according to steatosis score (panel A), ballooning score (panel B), lobular inflammation score (panel C) and fibrosis score (panel D). For all panels two data points with a HOMA-IR level above 20 are not shown in the boxplots. In panel C the group with more than four inflammatory foci only consisted of one patient and is excluded from analysis and the graph. In panel D the groups with scores 3 and 4 are excluded from analysis and this figure as those groups consisted of three and one patient, respectively. Statistically significant differences are indicated in bold in the figures. HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment-estimated insulin resistance; K-W, Kruskal–Wallis.
Correlations between individual histological components and characteristics of glucose metabolism.
| Steatosis ( | Inflammation ( | Ballooning ( | Fibrosis ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 0.096 (0.403) | 0.040 (0.726) | 0.101 (0.380) | 0.097 (0.403) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.053 (0.647) | −0.085 (0.461) | −0.195 (0.086) | 0.008 (0.943) |
| TG (mmol/L)a | 0.171 (0.137) | |||
| NEFA (mEq/L) | −0.144 (0.305) | 0.145 (0.299) | −0.071 (0.612) | 0.090 (0.527) |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | 0.173 (0.130) | |||
| Insulin (pmol/L) | 0.170 (0.137) | 0.152 (0.183) | ||
| HOMA-IR | 0.186 (0.102) | 0.187 (0.101) |
Results are represented as the correlation coefficient (P value). Significant P values are indicated in bold.
aOne patient is excluded as it had an extreme high value (TG = 16.14 mmol/L).
BMI, body mass index; TG, triglycerides; NEFA, non-esterified fatty acids; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment-estimated insulin resistance.