4.7 Article

Inverse association between liver fat content and hepatic glucose uptake in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Journal

METABOLISM-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL
Volume 57, Issue 10, Pages 1445-1451

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.metabol.2008.05.015

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this research was to study (1) the mutual relationship between liver fat content (LFC) and hepatic glucose uptake (HGU) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and (2) the relationship between changes in LFC and HGU uptake induced by rosiglitazone in these patients. Liver fat was measured with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy and insulin-stimulated HGU with [F-18]-labeled 2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in 54 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 8 healthy Subjects. Measurements were repeated in diabetic patients after a 16-week intervention period with rosiglitazone (n = 27) or placebo (n = 27). Patients with diabetes had lower HGU (24.5 +/- 14.2 vs 35.6 +/- 9.7 mu mol/[kg min], P < .01) and higher LFC (10.9% +/- 9.2% vs 2.5% +/- 1.4%, P < .001) compared with healthy subjects. Liver fat was inversely associated with HGU (r = -0.31, P < .05). but more strongly with whole-body insulin sensitivity and adiponectin levels. Rosiglitazone treatment reduced liver fat by 24.8% (P = .01 vs placebo) and increased HGU by 29.2% (P = .013 vs placebo). This decrease in LFC was best explained by the increment in suppression of nonesterified fatty acid levels during hyperinsulinemia (P < .001) and improved glycemic control (P = .034), but not by changes in HGU. A significant inverse relationship between LFC and HGU was observed, but changes were not related. This suggests that the beneficial effects of rosiglitazone on liver metabolism are indirect and can be partly explained by increased suppression of nonesterified fatty acid levels, leading to reduced liver fat. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available