4.2 Article

Effects of parenteral nutrition without and with growth hormone on growth hormone/insulin-like growth factor-1 axis after hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma with liver cirrhosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF PARENTERAL AND ENTERAL NUTRITION
Volume 31, Issue 6, Pages 496-501

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1177/0148607107031006496

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Complex alterations in the growth hormone (GH)/insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) axis are thought to play an important role in the protein catabolism that complicates major surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential roles of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) therapy after hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with liver cirrhosis, and to investigate whether postoperative administration of rhGH increases the risk of tumor recurrences. Methods: Twenty-four patients with HCC in the setting of cirrhosis who underwent hepatectomy were randomly divided into 2 groups: parenteral nutrition (PN) group (n = 12) and rhGH + parenteral nutrition group (n = 12). Liver function, serum GH, IGF-1, and IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) were measured before operation, at postoperative days (POD) 1 and 6. IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 mRNA in liver tissue was measured by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Liver Ki67 immunohistochemistry staining was studied. At the same time, 12 patients with cholelithiasis or liver hemangioma who underwent operation were segregated as a normal control. Results: On POD 6, compared with the PN group, serum prealbumin, GH, IGF- 1, IGFBP-3, hepatic IGF- 1 mRNA, IGFBP-3 mRNA, and liver Ki67 LI were higher in rhGH + PN group. The 6- and 12-month tumor-free survival rates, a median tumor-free survival time, were not different between the PN and rhGH + PN group. Conclusions: rhGH + PN can ameliorate changes in the GH/IGF-1 axis after hepatectomy for HCC in the setting of cirrhosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available