Benjamin A Juliar1, Clarissa Strieder-Barboza2,3, Monita Karmakar2, Carmen G Flesher2, Nicki A Baker2, Oliver A Varban2, Carey N Lumeng3,4,5, Andrew J Putnam1, Robert W O'Rourke2,6. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Department of Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases, University of Michigan Medical School, \unskip\break Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Graduate Program in Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 5. Graduate Program in Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, \unskip\break Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity-induced chronic inflammation and fibrosis in adipose tissue contributes to the progression of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). While fibrosis is known to induce mechanical stiffening of numerous tissue types, it is unknown whether DM is associated with alterations in adipose tissue mechanical properties. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether DM is associated with differences in bulk viscoelastic properties of adipose tissue from diabetic (DM) and non-diabetic (NDM) obese subjects. METHODS: Bulk shear rheology was performed on visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous (SAT) adipose tissue, collected from obese subjects undergoing elective bariatric surgery. Rheology was also performed on the remaining extracellular matrix (ECM) from decellularized VAT (VAT ECM). Linear mixed models were used to assess whether correlations existed between adipose tissue mechanical properties and DM status, sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: DM was not associated with significant differences in adipose tissue viscoelastic properties for any of the tissue types investigated. Tissue type dependent differences were however detected, with VAT having significantly lower shear storage and loss moduli than SAT and VAT ECM independent of DM status. CONCLUSION: Although DM is typically associated with adipose tissue fibrosis, it is not associated with differences in macroscopic adipose tissue mechanical properties.
BACKGROUND:Obesity-induced chronic inflammation and fibrosis in adipose tissue contributes to the progression of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). While fibrosis is known to induce mechanical stiffening of numerous tissue types, it is unknown whether DM is associated with alterations in adipose tissue mechanical properties. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether DM is associated with differences in bulk viscoelastic properties of adipose tissue from diabetic (DM) and non-diabetic (NDM) obese subjects. METHODS: Bulk shear rheology was performed on visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous (SAT) adipose tissue, collected from obese subjects undergoing elective bariatric surgery. Rheology was also performed on the remaining extracellular matrix (ECM) from decellularized VAT (VAT ECM). Linear mixed models were used to assess whether correlations existed between adipose tissue mechanical properties and DM status, sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS:DM was not associated with significant differences in adipose tissue viscoelastic properties for any of the tissue types investigated. Tissue type dependent differences were however detected, with VAT having significantly lower shear storage and loss moduli than SAT and VAT ECM independent of DM status. CONCLUSION: Although DM is typically associated with adipose tissue fibrosis, it is not associated with differences in macroscopic adipose tissue mechanical properties.
Authors: Marion Geerligs; Gerrit W M Peters; Paul A J Ackermans; Cees W J Oomens; Frank P T Baaijens Journal: Biorheology Date: 2008 Impact factor: 1.875
Authors: Nadia Alkhouli; Jessica Mansfield; Ellen Green; James Bell; Beatrice Knight; Neil Liversedge; Ji Chung Tham; Richard Welbourn; Angela C Shore; Katarina Kos; C Peter Winlove Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 4.310
Authors: Andrea Porzionato; Elena Stocco; Silvia Barbon; Francesca Grandi; Veronica Macchi; Raffaele De Caro Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Marion Geerligs; Gerrit W M Peters; Paul A J Ackermans; Cees W J Oomens; Frank P T Baaijens Journal: J Biomech Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: V Pellegrinelli; J Heuvingh; O du Roure; C Rouault; A Devulder; C Klein; M Lacasa; E Clément; D Lacasa; K Clément Journal: J Pathol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Nils Halberg; Tayeba Khan; Maria E Trujillo; Ingrid Wernstedt-Asterholm; Alan D Attie; Shariq Sherwani; Zhao V Wang; Shira Landskroner-Eiger; Sean Dineen; Ulysses J Magalang; Rolf A Brekken; Philipp E Scherer Journal: Mol Cell Biol Date: 2009-06-22 Impact factor: 4.272
Authors: Kai Sun; Jiyoung Park; Olga T Gupta; William L Holland; Pernille Auerbach; Ningyan Zhang; Roberta Goncalves Marangoni; Sarah M Nicoloro; Michael P Czech; John Varga; Thorkil Ploug; Zhiqiang An; Philipp E Scherer Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Mitra Aliabouzar; Adam W Y Ley; Sabine Meurs; Andrew J Putnam; Brendon M Baker; Oliver D Kripfgans; J Brian Fowlkes; Mario L Fabiilli Journal: Bioprinting Date: 2021-12-28
Authors: Tânia B Cruz; Filomena A Carvalho; Paulo N Matafome; Raquel A Soares; Nuno C Santos; Rui D Travasso; Maria J Oliveira Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2021-12-28