| Literature DB >> 35745058 |
Diren Beyoğlu1,2, Cedric Simillion3, Federico Storni4, Andrea De Gottardi5,6, Jeffrey R Idle1,2.
Abstract
Ascites is a common complication of decompensated liver cirrhosis, and yet relatively little is known about its biochemical composition. We conducted two metabolomic investigations, comparing the profile of ascites from 33 cirrhotic patients and postoperative peritoneal drainage fluid from 33 surgical patients (Experiment 1). The profile of paired ascites and plasma was also compared in 17 cirrhotic patients (Experiment 2). Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry-based metabolomics identified 29 metabolites that significantly characterized ascites fluid, whether postoperative drainage fluid or plasma were used as controls. Ten elevated amino acids (glutamine, proline, histidine, tyrosine, glycine, valine, threonine, methionine, lysine, phenylalanine) and seven diminished lipids (laurate, myristate, palmitate, oleate, vaccenate, stearate, cholesterol) largely comprised the cirrhotic ascites metabolomic phenotype that differed significantly (adjusted p < 0.002 to 0.03) from peritoneal drainage fluid or plasma. The pattern of upregulated amino acids in cirrhotic ascites did not indicate albumin proteolysis by peritoneal bacteria. Bidirectional clustering showed that the more severe the cirrhosis, the lower the lipid concentration in ascitic fluid. The metabolomic compartment of ascites in patients with decompensated cirrhosis is characterized by increased amino acids and decreased lipids. These novel findings have potential relevance for diagnostic purposes.Entities:
Keywords: amino acids; ascites; cholesterol; decompensated cirrhosis; fatty acids; metabolomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35745058 PMCID: PMC9228447 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27123935
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Figure 1Multivariate data analysis of ascites metabolites vs. postoperative surgical drainage fluid metabolites. (a) Unsupervised PCA scores plot showing partial separation of cirrhotic ascites samples (blue) and surgical postoperative drainage samples (pink). Each point represents a sample analyzed by GC-MS. The Hotelling’s ellipse represents the 95% confidence boundary. (b) Supervised OPLS-DA scores plot showing clustering and separation of ascites and surgical drainage samples. (c), OPLS-DA loadings S-plot showing metabolites upregulated in ascites fluid (top right) and metabolites downregulated in ascites relative to control drainage fluid (bottom left). The X-axis (p[1]) represents the variable magnitude and the Y-axis (p(corr)[1]) represents the reliability of the variable.
Metabolites showing a difference in relative concentration between ascitic fluid from cirrhotic patients and peritoneal fluid from postoperative surgical patients.
| Metabolite | Control Peritoneal Fluid | Cirrhotic | * | Ascites/ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| METABOLIC INTERMEDIATES | ||||
| Lactic acid (Y) | 1071 | 451 | <0.002 | 0.4 |
| Glycolic acid (N) | 4 | 6 | 0.007 | 1.5 |
| Citric acid (Y) | 47 | 124 | <0.002 | 2.6 |
| Uric acid (Y) | 62 | 138 | <0.002 | 2.2 |
| AMINO ACIDS AND AMINO ACID METABOLITES | ||||
| Glutamic acid (Y) | 9 | 2 | <0.002 | 0.2 |
| Glutamine (Y) | 36 | 61 | <0.002 | 1.7 |
| Proline (N) | 113 | 149 | 0.005 | 1.3 |
| Histidine (Y) | 7 | 13 | 0.007 | 1.9 |
| Tyrosine (Y) | 58 | 107 | <0.002 | 1.8 |
| 2-Ketoisocaproic acid (N) | 2 | 0.8 | <0.002 | 0.4 |
| Pipecolic acid (N) | 1 | 3 | <0.002 | 3.0 |
| SUGARS AND SUGAR METABOLITES | ||||
| Erythritol (N) | 2 | 5 | <0.002 | 2.5 |
| Mannitol (N) | 110 | 21 | 0.002 | 0.2 |
| Gluconic acid (N) | 3 | 2 | <0.002 | 0.7 |
| 20 | 42 | <0.002 | 2.1 | |
| 1 | 5 | <0.002 | 5.0 | |
| Fructose (N) | 5 | 18 | <0.002 | 3.6 |
| LIPIDS | ||||
| Lauric acid (12:0) (Y) | 2 | 0.8 | <0.002 | 0.4 |
| Myristic acid (14:0) (Y) | 4 | 1 | <0.002 | 0.3 |
| Palmitic acid (16:0) (Y) | 41 | 12 | <0.002 | 0.3 |
| Linoleic acid (18:2 9 | 5 | 2 | <0.002 | 0.4 |
| Oleic acid (18:1 9 | 27 | 7 | <0.002 | 0.3 |
| Stearic acid (18:0) (N) | 14 | 6 | <0.002 | 0.4 |
| Cholesterol (Y) | 31 | 16 | <0.002 | 0.5 |
* Nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test. p values adjusted by Bonferroni correction.
Figure 2Multivariate data analysis of ascites metabolites vs. paired plasma metabolites. (a) Unsupervised PCA scores plot showing partial separation of cirrhotic ascites fluid (blue) and plasma samples (pink) from the same patients. Each point represents a sample analyzed by GC-MS. (b) Supervised OPLS-DA scores plot showing clustering and separation of cirrhotic ascites fluid and plasma samples. (c) OPLS-DA loadings S-plot showing metabolites upregulated in ascites fluid (top right) and metabolites downregulated in ascites samples relative to paired plasma samples (bottom left).
Metabolites showing a difference in ascites and plasma relative concentration.
| Metabolite | Plasma | Ascites | Ascites/ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMINO ACIDS | ||||
| Glycine (Y) | 31 | 43 | 0.004 | 1.4 |
| Valine (Y) | 61 | 73 | 0.004 | 1.2 |
| Proline (N) | 85 | 136 | 0.002 | 1.6 |
| Threonine (N) | 12 | 22 | 0.002 | 1.8 |
| Methionine (Y) | 9 | 13 | 0.004 | 1.4 |
| Lysine (Y) | 17 | 22 | 0.004 | 1.3 |
| Glutamine (Y) | 34 | 62 | 0.02 | 1.8 |
| Phenylalanine (Y) | 27 | 34 | 0.03 | 1.3 |
| Tyrosine (Y) | 65 | 113 | 0.004 | 1.7 |
| OTHER INTERMEDIARY METABOLITES | ||||
| Pyruvic acid (Y) | 328 | 532 | 0.004 | 1.6 |
| Fumaric acid (N) | 1 | 3 | 0.02 | 3.0 |
| Sorbitol (N) | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.02 | 1.5 |
| Phosphate (N) | 371 | 49 | 0.007 | 0.1 |
| LIPIDS | ||||
| Myristic acid (14:0) (Y) | 5 | 1 | 0.002 | 0.2 |
| Palmitic acid (16:0) (Y) | 59 | 12 | 0.002 | 0.2 |
| Oleic acid (18:1 9 | 45 | 6 | 0.002 | 0.1 |
| Vaccenic acid (18:1 11 | 4 | 0.7 | 0.002 | 0.2 |
| Stearic acid (18:0) (N) | 12 | 5 | 0.002 | 0.4 |
| Cholesterol (Y) | 97 | 21 | 0.002 | 0.2 |
* Nonparametric Wilcoxon matched pairs test. p values adjusted by Bonferroni correction.
Figure 3Clinical variables for 33 cirrhotic ascites patients (blue) and 33 surgical postoperative drainage patients (pink) shown as means ± SD. Statistical significances are represented by *, p < 0.05; ***, p < 0.001; ****, p < 0.0001.
Figure 4Cluster maps showing bidirectional clustering of clinical covariates from Experiment 1; (a), metabolites in drainage fluid for postoperative surgical patients (n = 33); (b), metabolites in cirrhotic ascites fluid (n = 33); from Experiment 2: (c), metabolites in paired plasma (n = 17); (d), metabolites in paired cirrhotic ascites fluid (n = 17); (e), metabolites as log fold concentration (logFC) difference between cirrhotic ascites fluid and paired plasma (n = 17) in Experiment 2. Abbreviations: 1—galactose; 2—erythritol; 3—myo-inositol; 4—2,3-dihydroxybutanoic acid; 5—cysteine; 6—2-ketoisocaproic acid; 7—cholesterol; 8—palmitic acid; 9—stearic acid; 10—vaccenic acid ((11E)-11-octadecenoic acid); 11—myristic acid; 12—2-hydroxy-3-methylbutanoic acid; 13—leucine; 14—valine; 15—2-aminobutanoic acid; 16—isoleucine; 17—tyrosine; 18—oleic acid; A—estimated glomerular filtration rate; B—Quick’s test (prothrombin time); C—sex; D—plasma creatinine concentration; E—body weight; F—body mass index; G—thrombocytes; H—plasma albumin concentration; I—total plasma protein; J—aspartate aminotransferase; K—Child–Pugh score; L—age. A key to the colors and their distribution is also given.