4.6 Article

Protein-sensitive and fasting hypoglycemia in children with the hyperinsulinism/hyperammonemia syndrome

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Volume 138, Issue 3, Pages 383-389

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1067/mpd.2001.111818

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [MO1 RR-00240] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK 56268, R01 DK 53012] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Because the hyperinsulinism/hyperammonemia (HI/HA) syndrome is associated with gain of function mutations in the leucine-stimulated insulin secretion pathway, we examined whether protein feeding or fasting was responsible for hypoglycemia in affected patients. Study design: Patients with HI/HA (8 children and 6 adults) were studied. All had dominantly expressed mutations of glutamate dehydrogenase and plasma concentrations of ammonium that were 2 to 5 times normal. The responses to a 24-hour fasting test were determined in 7 patients. Responses to a 1.5 g gm/kg oral protein tolerance test in 12 patients were compared with responses of 5 control subjects Results: The median age at onset of` hypoglycemia in the 14 patients was 9 months; diagnosis was delayed beyond age 2 years in 6 patients, and 4 were not given a diagnosis until adulthood. Fasting tests revealed unequivocal evidence of hyperinsulinism in only 1 of 7 patients. Three did not develop hypoglycemia until 12 to 24 hours of fasting; however, all 7 demonstrated inappropriate glycemic responses to glucagon that were characteristic of hyperinsulinism, In response to oral protein, all 12 patients with HI/HA showed a fall in blood glucose compared with none of 5 control subjects. Insulin responses to protein loading were similar in the patients with HI/HA and control subjects. Conclusion: The postprandial blood glucose response to a protein meal is more sensitive than prolonged fasting for detecting hypoglycemia in the HI/HA syndrome.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available