4.1 Article

Monitoring of lipodystrophic and metabolic abnormalities in HIV-1 infected children on antiretroviral therapy

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.14310/horm.2002.1305

关键词

Antiretroviral therapy; Children; DXA; Dyslipidemia; HIV; Lipodystrophy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have thus far assessed body composition by dual energy X-ray absorptrometry (DXA) in children with HIV, primarily because reference data for normally growing children and adolescents are not available. Our study aimed at evaluating body composition in children with HIV and their relation to serum lipids and glucose homeostasis. DESIGN: Body composition was assessed by DXA in 17 HIV-1 infected children at entrance to the study and after 12 months and in one hundred fifty nine age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and Tanner stage matched healthy subjects who served as controls. Lipodystrophy was diagnosed if the trunk/leg fat ratio was out of the range of the expected mean +/- 1SD of the controls. RESULTS: At study entry, 10 patients (7 girls) had developed lipohypertrophy, whereas all remaining patients had lipoatrophy. Lipohypertrophy was associated with older age (p = 0.027). Lipodystrophic phenotype was stable in all patients except in one over the 12-month period of follow-up while on continuous antiretroviral therapy (ART). 80% and 70% of patients with lipohypertrophy had triglycerides and cholesterol levels, respectively above the 75(th) percentile, while 57% and 43% of patients with lipoatrophy had triglycerides and cholesterol, respectively greater than the 75(th) percentile. High triglycerides were associated with the use of protease inhibitors (p = 0.028). Basal fasting glucose and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) values were within normal limits. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-infected paediatric patients on continuous ART developed significant and persistent body composition changes which were associated with dyslipidemia without overt abnormalities of glucose metabolism.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据